Page images

grandchildren be entitled to the testator's personal estate, if he had then died intestate. S., and after her E., died under twenty-five. At E.'s death, M. was the testator's sole next of kin. Held, that the persons who at the death of E. would have been the next of kin of the testator if M. also had then been dead, were entitled to file a bill for the administration of his estate, although of a remoter class than M. — White v. Springett, L. R. 4 Ch. 300.

9. A testatrix gave property in trust as to one-fourth for A. for life and then to A.'s children at twenty-three. Any child attaining twenty-three iu the lifetime of A. was to acquire a vested interest. In case of the death of A. without leaving children as aforesaid, the trustees were to pay, apply, and dispose of the income of A.'s fourth to and amongst testatrix's "surviving" daughters, such " benefit of survivorship" to extend to the "surviving" as well as to the original shares. The principal to go to the children of such daughters. The other three-fourths upon like trusts for the testatrix's other three daughters, B., C., and D., and their children. If all the daughters died and none of their children reached twentythree, the fund was to be held for the next of kin. A. died, leaving children who reached twenty-three. Then C. died childless. Later, D. died, leaving children who reached twenty-three. Held, that "surviving" was to be read " other," and the children of A. took part of C.'s share as well as the children of D. — Badger v. Oregon/, L. R. 8 Eq. 78.

10. Trust to pay one-fourth of the income each to testator's four sisters for life, and so soon as any of them should die "without leaving issue," the share of those "so dying without issue" to be divisible among the surviving sisters "and the issue of any who may then be dead, in equal . . . shares, but such issue to take only their respective parent's share." And so soon as any of said sisters should die and "leave issue," then to call in the shares of them so dying "leaving issue, and pay the same unto such respective issue, if more than one child, equally." One of said sisters died, having had two children, one of whom survived her mother, and the other died in her mothers lifetime, after the testator, leaving a family. Held, that a moiety of the deceased sister's share went to the family of her deceased child.

"Leaving issue" meant "having had children." — Bryden v. Willett, L. R. 7 Eq. 472.

11. A testator gave his residuary estate to trustees in trust to convert into money such parts thereof as should not at his decease consist in money or be invested in any of the public funds or government securities, and to invest the same in such public funds or government securities as to them should seem most advantageous, and to pay the interest, dividends, and annual proceeds of such residue in equal shares to his children for their lives, and after their deaths upon other trusts. Held, that the tenants for life were entitled to enjoy in specie long annuities of which the testator died possessed. — Wilday v. Sandys, L. R. 7 Eq. 455.

12. C. left all his property to G. by will, and appointed him his executor. When al^ut to die, C. sent for G. and told him privately of his will; G. said, "Is that right?" C. answered, "It shall be no other way." C. also told G. that he would find the will in a certain place and a letter with it. G. testified that nothing further parsed between him and C. The letter named many persons to whom C. wished various sums to be paid, but after phrases implying some discretion to be allowed to G., there was this sentence: "I do not wish you to act strictly to the foregoing instructions, but leave it entirely to your own good judgment to do as you think I would if living, and as the parties are deserving, and as it is not my wish that you should say any thing about this document there cannot be any fault found with you by any of the parties should you not act in strict accordance with it." G. paid money to some of the persons mentioned in the letter, but not to all. Held, that the letter did not impose any trust on G.—McCormick v. Grogan, L. R. 4 H. L. 82.

13. A testator "devised and bequeathed all his other property whatsoever and wheresoever" to trustees, without words of limitation, after a specific devise of lands with such words. He had no other lands at the date of his will, and the terms of the trust, except the word "income," were not appropriate to realty. He afterwards became entitled to real estate of great value. Held, that the latter passed to the trustees by the will. — Lloyd v. Lloyd, L. R. 7 Eq. 458.

14. A testator made a will in favor of his sister only, giving her " all my house and land and book debts," &c., "every thing on the said premises," "and all other chattels." Held, that the last words carried the general residue.— Goods of Sharman, L. R. 1 P. & D. 661.

See Apportionment, 2; Charity, 1, 2; Devise; Election; Executor And Administrator, 1, 4; Forfeiture; Legacy; Partition; Perpetuity; Revocation Of Will.

Winding Up. — See Company, 1.
Witness. — See Will, 5.


•'All other Chattels." See Will, 14.
"Beneficial Interest.'' — See Succession Duty.
"Dwelling Place or Shop.'' — See Statute, 2.
"For the time being entitled.''— See Deed, 1.
"Interest in land injuriously affected.'' — See Statute, 1.
"Issue," "Leaving Issue."—See Will, 10.
"Landed." — See Statute, 3.
"Lands or hereditaments in fee simple in possession." — See Trust, 2.
"No hope at present of recovery." — See Evidence, 2.
"Perils of the Sea," Sfc. — See Insurance, 1.
"Personal Luggage." — See Carrier, 2.
"Profits in Hand." See Company, 2.
"Public funds or government securities."— See Will, 11.
"Sole Executors." — See Revocation Of Will, 3.
"Spirituous Liquors." — See Covenant, 2.
"Surviving." — See Will, 9.
"Undertake, execute, hold, or enjoy any contract." — See Parliament.
Writ Of Error. — See Error.

Writ Of Restitution.
The Court of Queen's Bench had at common law no jurisdiction to issue a writ
of restitution except as part of the judgment on an appeal of larceny; and 21 Hen.
VHI. c. 11, and 24 & 25 Vict. c. 96, § H«', only confer this jurisdiction on the
Court before whom the felon has been convicted. — The Queen v. Lord Mayor of
London, L. R. 4 Q. B. 371.


[for the present number of the Digest, selections have been made from the following volumes of State Reports: 52 Barbour (New York); 5 Coldwell (Tennessee); 4 C. E. Green (19 New Jersey Equity); 42, 43 Illinois; 20 Louisiana Annual; 55 Maine; 28 Maryland; 98 Massachusetts; 17 Michigan; 13 Minnesota; 2 Oregon; 57 Pennsylvania State; 3 Vroom (32 New Jersey).]


That a prior suit in personam between the same parties and for the same cause of action was pending in another State at the time of bringing the action is not a defence. — Seevers v. Clement, 28 Md. 426.


1. A mare with foal was sold, to remain the property of the vendor until paid for. She foaled and the vendor brought replevin for the colt, the price not having been paid. Held, that he could recover. —Allen v. Delano, 55 Me. 118.

2. In Maine the increase of a mare owned by a married woman, and kept on her husband's farm, belongs to her. — Hanson v. MUlett, 55 Me. 184.


1. An action ex contractu does not lie against one who fraudulently represents himself as the agent of another and makes a contract in his name. The remedy is case for deceit. — Noyes v. Loring, 55 Me. 408.

2. A widow can maintain an action on the case against one who, after her application for dower but before it is assigned, enters on dowable lands of which her husband died seised and cuts down trees thereon. — Sogers v. Potter, 3 Vroom, 78.

See Breach Of Promise; Corporation, 3, 4; Municipal Corporation; Negligence; Nuisance, 3, 5, 6; Parent And Child; Seduction; Tenancy At Will; Tenancy In Common; Wager.

Act Of God.

The breach of a contract to navigate on a river is excused if caused by the river's freezing so as to make navigation impossible, this being an act of God. That the contractor at the time of making the contract had reasons which were equally obvious to the other party for expecting such an event does not alter the case. — Worth v. Edmonds, 52 Barb. 40.

Administration.—See Executor And Administrator.

Assumpsit for the value of land conveyed by plaintiff to defendant in consideration of an oral promise by the latter to convey other land worth $2000 to the

plaintiff, which promise defendant now refuses to perform. Held, that defendant's
agreement and the value of the land to have been conveyed by him might be
proved as an admission of the value of the land which he received. —Bassett v.
Bassett, 55 Me. 127.
See Estofpel.

Affidavit.—See Removal Of Suits From State To United States Courts.
Agent. — See Principal And Agent.
Agreement. — See Contract.

Alteration Of Instruments. The alteration of the number of a State bond payable to bearer, and not required by law to be numbered, is immaterial, and though made with fraudulent intent does not avoid it in the hands of a subsequent bona fide holder for value without notice. — Commonwealth v. Emigrant Industrial Savings Bank, 98 Mass. 12.

Assault And Battery. — See Corporation, 8.

1. A debtor residing in New York made an assignment with preferences for the benefit of his creditors, such disposition being legal in that State. Inter alia, he conveyed in due form land in New Jersey, by whose laws such assignments are invalid. Held, that the conveyance was valid as against creditors not living in New Jersey. — Bentley v. Whittemore, 4 C. E. Green, 462.

2. A Virginia corporation assigned its property for the benefit of creditors, reserving possession to itself for a certain time and giving preferences. Experts testified that by the construction of Stat. 13 Eliz. ch. 5 in Virginia, where the deed was executed, it was not invalid on its face. The corporation, however, had its principal place of business and much of its personal property in Maryland. Held, a good conveyance of the property in Maryland, whatever might be the construction of said statute there. — Baltimore & Ohio R.R. Co. v. Glenn, 28 Md. 287.

See Mortgage; Partnership, 1.


Plaintiff paid $50 in part performance of an oral contract for the purchase of land. He afterwards refused to go on with the contract and demanded repayment of the $50. Held, that he could not recover. —Plummer v. Bucknam, 55 Me. 105.

See Action; Admission; Broker, 1; Carrier, 3; Contract, 6; Parent And Child; Tenancy At Will; Tenancy In Common; Usury; Wager.


An agent deposited money of his principal in a bank in his own name. The fund was attached by a creditor of the agent, and immediately afterwards notice oi ownership was given by the principal. Held, that the attaching creditor was in no better position than the agent making the deposit. —Farmers' <fc Mechanies' Nat. Bank v. King, 57 Penn. St. 202.

See Execution; Partnership, 1.

Attorney. — See Confederate Money, 4.

[ocr errors]

Bailment. — See Attachment; Carrier; Consignor; Finder of Proferty; Legal Tender, 3-5; Railroad, 2; Wager.


The charter of a bank provided that "All bills, bonds, notes, and every contract on behalf of the company, shall be signed by the President, and countersigned and attested by the Cashier of the company; and the funds of the company shall, in no wise, be held responsible for any contract or engagement whatever, unless the same shall be executed as aforesaid." The cashier made a draft in the usual course of his business, signed by himself alone, "R. T. J., cashier." Held, that the above section did not apply, that the bank was liable for advances made upon said draft, and that the cashier was not.—Northern Bank of Ky. v. Johnson, 5 Cold. 88.

See Attachment; Check, 4, 5; Legal Tender, 5; National Bank; Tax, 1, 2.


When proceedings had been begun in State courts under State laws before the United States Bankrupt Law was enacted they were unaffected by the same, and when the penal clauses of the State laws can be made operative they must be. — Longis v. His Creditors, 20 La. An. 15. See Meekins v. Creditors, 19 ib. 497; 3 Am. Law Rev. 303.

Belligerent Rights. — See Confederacy.


The legislature of Oregon authorized a city to assess the cost of improvements on a street in said city to the abutters upon the same. Held, that the act was constitutional.—King v. City of Portland, 2 Oregon, 146.

Bill Of Lading.—See Peril Of The Sea.

Bills And Notes.

1. A promise to accept a bill made by the drawee to the drawer after the bill has been negotiated by the latter, will not make the drawee liable to the holder as acceptor. —Exchange Bank of St. Louis v. Bice, 98 Mass. 288.

2. A bill drawn on the P. Insurance Co. by their agents F. & Co., and ending thus: "Charge the same to account of F. & Co. Agts. P. Ins. Co.," binds F. & Co. personally as drawers, although delivered by the insurance company to the payee in payment of a loss on one of their policies, and evidence of a contrary expectation and intent is inadmissible. — Tucker Manufacturing Co. v. Fairbanks, 98 Mass. 101.

3. The words "protest waived" on a promissory note do not dispense with demand and notice. — Wilkins v. Qillis, 20 La. An. 538.

4. When the holder of a note was within the United States lines and the maker within the Confederate lines, at its maturity, demand was not necessary until within a reasonable time after the removal of the impediments. — Appersonv. Bynum, 5 Cold. 341; Polk v. Spinks, ib. 431.

See Alteration Of Instruments; Check; Contract, 4; Illegal ConTract, 2; Limitations, Statute Of; Stamp.

Bona Fide Purchaser. — See Sale, 2.

« PreviousContinue »