페이지 이미지

Ross v. St. Louis, I. M. & S. Ry. Co., 179 S. Om 188 (Ky.) In an action for injuries to an W. 353.

automobile at a railroad crossing, it was not

error to fix the maximum amount which might (C) Interest, Costs, and Expenses of Liti-l be recovered at the greatest, which any evigation,

dence conduced to show was the difference been 69 (Tex.Civ.App.) In an action in tort, in-tween the market value of the machine imterest is a part of the damages.-San Antonio & mediately before and immediately after the inA. P. Ry. Co. v. Schaeffer, 179 S. W. 540. jury.-Cincinnati, N. O. & T. P. Ry. Co. v.

Sweeney, 179 S. W. 214.

(C) Proceedings for Assessment. Om78 (Tex.Civ.App.) A provision of a building om 208 (Tex.) In an action by a city fireman

Om contract that $5 should be forfeited for each against a railway company for injuries due to day's delay, held to be a stipulation for liquidat- an explosion, the issue of damages for lost time ed damages rather than for a penalty.-Gillespie held properly submitted to the jury under conv. Williams, 179 S. W. 1101.

flicting evidence.—Houston Belt & Terminal Ry.

Co. v. Johansen, 179 S. W. 853. VI. MEASURE OF DAMAGES.

DEATH. (B) Injuries to Property. Em 108 (Ark.) The measure of damages for in- See Courts, Ow7; Executors and Administrajury to the pool supplying plaintiff's cotton gin

tors, 11; Limitation of Actions, Omw124; with water held the cost of restoration and the Statutes, 231; Trial, en 256; Wills, Om value of the lost use, not the depreciation in

775. market value.-Ross & Ross v. St. Louis, I. M. & S. Ry. Co., 179 S. W. 353.


SURVIVORSHIP. Om 113 (Ky.) In an action for injuries to an automobile, an instruction that the measure of m5 (Tex.Civ.App.) Where a husband and damages was the difference in value before and wife, making mutual wills, were frozen to death after the injury held erroneous as not being

in the same snowstorm, with no evidence as to based on the market value.-Cincinnati, N. 0. which died first, there was no presumption as & T. P. Ry. Co. v. Sweeney, 179 S. W. 214.

to survivorship or simultaneous death.-Fitz


(A) Right of Action and Defenses. On 130 (Mo.App.) In a truck driver's action against a city for personal injuries, verdict for en 8 (Tenn.) A right of action for wrongful

Omw $2,000 held not excessive.-Morrill v. Kansas death is governed by the laws of the state where City, 179 S. W. 759.

the injury occurred. --Sharp v. Cincinnati, N. 0.

& T. P. Ry. Co., 179 S. W. 375. Om 131 (Ky.) An award of $2,000 in favor of an employé in a coal mine heid'excessive for in-law 10 (Tenn.) The right of action for wrongful juries caused by shock of a low-voltage wire.- death given by Shannon's Code, 8 4025 et seq.,

a Împerial Jellico Coal Co. v. Neff, 179 S. W. and the recovery is in right of the deceased.

sw is that which the deceased would have had, 829.

v. & em 132 (Ky.) Verdict of $10,000 for injuries Sharp v Cincinnati, N. 0. & T. P. Ry. Co.,

179 W. . to boy between two and three years old cripm31 (Ky.) Under Ky. St. §. 4, giving widow pling him and totally destroying and disfig- and minor child of person killed by malicious uring one hand and arm held not excessive. and minor child of person killed by malicious uring one hand and arm held not excessive.- use of firearms, etc., an action for damages, the Grau v. Ackerman, 179 S. W. 217. em 132 (Ky.) Personal injuries held to war- fect her right of recovery, or that of the chil

widow's remarriage pending the suit did not afrant verdict of $7,250.-Beall v. Louisville dren.-Archer v. Bowling,' 179 S. W. 15. Home Telephone Co., 179 S. W. 251. cm 132 (Ky.) An award of $9,500 in favor of a

(C) Parties and Process. brakeman 22 years of age, who earned $105 per Com 43 (Ky.) Under Const. § 241, and Ky. St. month, for injuries destroying use of his leg, $ 6, an action may be brought jointly against held not excessive.-Cincinnati, N. O. & T. P. both the employer and his servant whose negRy. Co. v. Nolan, 179 S. W. 1046.

ligence caused the death of deceased servant.

Carter Coal Co. v. Prichard's Adm'r, 179 S. VIII. PLEADING, EVIDENCE, AND W. 1038. ASSESSMENT.

Om 44 (Ky.) Under Ky. St. § 4, infant children

of one killed by malicious use of firearms, etc., (A) Pleading.

held entitled to join as parties plaintiff in a On 159 (Mo.App.) Under petition in action for suit originally brought by the widow alone.personal injury, alleging loss from inability to Archer v. Bowling, 179 S. W. 15. perform duties of his "employment," plaintiff could show the receipts from his practice of (E) Damages, Forfeiture, or Fine. dentistry.-Clark v. Dunham, 179 S. W. 795.

Oww.9! (Ky.) Under civil action for damages for

malicious killing brought under Ky. St. § 4, the (B) Evidence.

widow's remarriage pending suit did not diminOm 175 (Mo.App.) In action for damages for ish the damages which she and her minor chilbreach of contract concerning the assets and dren, as joint plaintiffs, might recover.-Archer management of a corporation, entitling plaintiff v. Bowling 179 S. W. 15. to purchase defendant's share, evidence as to 95 (Ky.) Under Ky. St. § 6, measure of

Om the probability of finding a purchaser, etc., held damages for killing by malicious use of firearms, admissible on the question of damages.-Powell etc., held a sum reasonably compensating the v. Batchelor, 179 S. W. 751.

widow and children for loss of deceased's earnOm 176 (Tex.Civ.App.) In action for breach of ing power, together with punitive damages, dicontract to furnish electric current for plain- vided one half to the widow and the other half tiff's theater building, plaintiff, in testifying to to the children.-Archer v. Bowling, 179 S. W. his loss of profits, was not bound to estimate

15. his loss for each pight separately. -City of Cm99 (Mo.App.) In action for death of plainBrownsville v. Tumlinson, 179 S. W. 1107. tiff's two year old daughter, verdict, exclusive of the $2,000 penalty, for $5,420, could not be (E) Conditions and Restrictions. declared excessive.-Albert v. St. Louis Electric mm 145 (Tex.Civ. App.) An agreement in a deed Terminal Ry. Co., 179 S. W. 955.

whereby vendees were to raise sugar cane and

sell it to the vendor held a condition, and not DEBTOR AND CREDITOR. a covenant.-Imperial Sugar Co. v. Cabell, 179

S. W. 83. See Fraudulent Conveyances.

147 (Tex. Civ.App.) A deed providing that DECLARATIONS.

title should pass to the vendee only upon condi

tion of full performance of the contract is not See Criminal Law, 413, 418, 422-427. ineffectual because partly based upon a sale of

personal property.- Imperial Sugar Co. v. CaDEEDS.

bell, 179 S. W. 83. See Covenants; Estoppel, em 21, 38; Evi- lien and declared it did not become absolute un

em 165 (Tex.Civ.App.) Where a deed retained a

On ; dence, Cw185, 419; Husband and Wife, emo til full performance by vendee, the vendor held 14; 'Logs and Logging, Cm3; Mortgages; entitled to possession under unimpaired title, Perpetuities; Trial, Om 253.

where the vendees repudiated the conditions.

Imperial Sugar Co. v. Cabell, 179 S. W. 83. I. REQUISITES AND VALIDITY. (A) Nature and Essentials of Conveyan


Omw 194 (Ark.) Plaintiff, in an action to set On 6 (Ark.) Instrument, though containing a aside a deed to a railroad, had the burden of granting clause, held, when considered as a showing that it had been wrongfully delivered ; whole, an executory contract, and not a deed. delivery to an agent and the recording of the -Mays v. Blair, 179 S. W. 331.

deed raising a presumption of delivery.-VaughOn 17 (Ky.) The fact that the grantor convey

an v. Chicago, R. I. & P. Ry. Co., 179 S. W. ing land in consideration that the grantee should

165. care for him during his lifetime lived only 68 Om 196 (Ky.) Where a conveyance is volundays thereafter did not render the considera- tary and without consideration or upon an intion inadequate; the test being whether the adequate consideration, and where there is a conveyance was fair and reasonable when made. relation of trust and confidence between the -Meece v. Colyer, 179 S. W. 579.

parties, the burden is upon the grantee to prove

that the grantor acted freely and understand(B) Form and Contents of Instruments. ingly.—Meece v. Colyer, 179 S. W. 579. On 38 (Ark.) Description of land in deed as

The mere fact that the grantor and the gran"part”, of a quarter section held insufficient, tee were uncle and nephew does not establish "part” not, as claimed, referring to the gran- such a confidential relation as would give rise tors' interest, but to the area.-Mays v. Blair, to the presumption of fraud.-Id. 179 S. W. 331.

w 208 (Ark.) Evidence held to sustain a find

ing that a deed had been delivered, and that the (D) Delivery.

title had vested in the grantee.-Vaughan v. Com 66 (Tex.Civ.App.) Whether a deed was de- Chicago, R. I. & P. Ry. Co., 179 S. W. 165. livered, held for the jury.--McLemore v. Bick-Ow211 (Ky.) In a proceeding to set aside a erstaff, 179 S. W. 536.

deed, etc., based on a conspiracy between a real

estate agent and vendee, held, that there was (E) Validity.

sufficient evidence, outside of the acts and decOm70 (Ky.) Where option to purchase land larations of the vendee, to sustain a judginent payable in corporate bonds provided for repur- in favor of the vendor.-Cole v. Collins, 179 S. chase of the bonds by the corporation, its in- W. 607. ability to repurchase held not a badge of fraud, nor ground for canceling the deed.-Yellow Chief

Coal Co.'s Trustee v. Johnson, 179 S. W. 599;
Same v. Preston, Id. 602.

See Officers, Ow43.


See Libel and Slander.
(A) General Rules of Construction.
Om 100 (Ky.) Where the meaning of an

DEFAULT. pression in a deed is not clear, evidence of the surrounding circumstances is admissible.-Wil- See Judgment, Om 138. son v. Marsee, 179 S. W. 410. Om 101 (Ky.) Where the meaning of a deed is DELEGATION OF POWER. not clear, evidence of the subsequent acts of the parties construing the deed is admissible.-Wil-See Constitutional Law, 60, 63. son v. Marsee, 179 S. W. 410.

DELINQUENT CHILDREN. (C) Estates and Interests Created. Om 124 (Ky.) Deed held to vest fee-simple title See Infants, eww12, 18. in grantees.-Chappell v. Frick Co., 179 S. W. 203.

DELIVERY. em 129 (Ky.) A deed conveying without limi- see Carriers, em 39, 45, 83–92, 140; Deeds, tation in the granting clause certain property

Om66, 194, 208. not to be subject to the debts of the grantees or the control of their husbands, the property upon the death of both to go to the children of

DEMAND. one, held to convey a life estate merely.-Tay-See Trover and Conversion, em 9. lor v. Dedman, 179 S. W. 216. (D) Exceptions and Reservations.

DEMONSTRATIVE EVIDENCE. Cmw 143 (Ky.) Where a grantor deeded land to See Criminal Law, w 404. another, reserving a life estate and power to revoke, the fee, upon her death without revoca

DEMURRER. tion, passed to the grantee regardless of her will. — Commonwealth v. McCauley's Ex'r, 179 See Indictment and

and Information, Om147;


DISSOLUTION. See Pleading, Om 180.

See Injunction, 163; Partnership, em 296. DEPOSITS.

DISTRICTS. See Banks and Banking, mm 123–154.

See Municipal Corporations, 265, 747. DESCENT AND DISTRIBUTION.

See Curtesy ; Executors and Administrators; See Drains.
Taxation, cm 860–895; Wills.

II. PERSONS ENTITLED AND THEIR See Corporations, Om 152, 156.

DIVORCE. (B) Surviving Husband or Wife. Om 52 Tenn.) Under Laws 1913, c. 26, remov-See Constitutional Law, Om83; Courts, em ing disabilities of coverture of married women, 223; Witnesses, On 60. a wife's personal property, undisposed of by her, passes, jure mariti, to her husband.-Baker v.



(A) Jurisdiction, Venue, and Limitations. DESCRIPTION

m 62 (Tex.Civ.App.) Under Vernon's Sayles' See Boundaries, em3; Deeds, ww38; Embez- Ann. Civ. Șt. 1914, art. 4632, prescribing the

; zlement, Cw28; Forgery, 'cm28;' Frauds, period of inhabitancy in the state and residence Statute of, Om110; Names.

in the county, jurisdictional to the maintenance

of an action for divorce, a temporary absence DESERTION.

during the six months next preceding filing of

the petition would not affect right to maintain See Parent and Child, 17.

the action.-Fox v. Fox, 179 S. W. 883. DIRECTING VERDICT.

(D) Evidence.

Om 124 (Tex. Civ.App.) Evidence in wife's acSee Appeal and Error, n927; Trial, en

tion for divorce and for the recovery of her 168.

separate property held to show that she had DISBARMENT.

been a bona fide inhabitant of the state for one

year, and a resident of the county for six months See Attorney and Client, m49-56.

next preceding the filing of the petition, withDISCHARGE.

in the jurisdictional requirement of Vernon's

Sayles' Ann. Civ. St. 1914, art. 4632.-Fox v. See Guaranty, 57, 67; Principal and Sure- Fox, 179 S. W. 883. ty, m104115.

Om 130 (Ky.) Evidence in a husband's action

for divorce for the wife's abandonment, with DISCOVERED PERIL.

counterclaim for divorce on the ground of cruel

and inhuman treatment, etc., and for alimony, See Negligence, Onw83; Railroads, Omw 376, held not to establish husband's cruel treatment 390; Street Railroads, Om 103.

so as to entitle wife to alimony.-Rice v. Rice,


(F) Judgment or Decree. See Appeal and Error, Om959–982; Criminal 152 (Ky.) The entry of a divorce judgment Law, 121, 586, 1148–1156; Divorce, en 223; Pleading, Omn 236, 261.

on the order book of the court is indispensable to establish the fact that a divorce has been

granted.—Robinson v. Robinson, 179 S. W. 436. DISCRIMINATION.

V. ALIMONY, ALLOWANCES, AND See Carriers, 13, 32; Constitutional Law,


Om 22! (Mo.App.) An order allowing or denyDISMISSAL AND NONSUIT. ing suit money to enable wife to prosecute an.

appeal from an adverse judgment in a divorce See Appeal and Error, Our 627, 773, 781, 784; suit is entirely independent from the issues in

Criminal Law, Om1131; Judgment, Om570 the divorce suit, and the right thereto is in no Limitation of Actions, @ww130; Removal of way dependent on the right to divorce.-Hall v. Causes, m 39.

Hall, 179 S. W. 738.

On 223 (Mo.App.) Where the lower court which DISORDERLY HOUSE.

denied a wife divorce awarded her temporary See Constitutional Law, Om63; Criminal Law, she was also entitled to suit money; it appear

alimony pending appeal, that order showed that Om 396; Nuisance, om 65, 72.

ing that she was destitute, so the denial of suit On 9 (Tex.Cr.App.) Married woman living with money was an abuse of discretion.-Hall v. her husband, who herself leased the premises and Hall, 179 S. W. 738. paid the rent, might be convicted of unlawfully On 224 (Mo.App.) Where a wife is destitute, keeping the house for prostitution.-Jackson v. she is entitled to suit money to prosecute an State, 179 S. W. 711.

appeal from judgment denying her divorce.Own 12 (Tex.Cr.App.) That information for un- Hall v. Hall, 179 S. W. 738. lawfully keeping a house for prostitution alleged On 236 (Mo.App.) Under Rev. St. 1909, § 2375, defendant to be a tenant, and not a lessee, agreement of parties to commute arrears of aliwas no ground for quashing, since “tenant” was mony and to change amount of alimony held synonymous

with lessee." -Jackson v. State, enforceable, in absence of fraud or imposition.179 S. W. 711.

Francis v. Francis, 179 S. W. 975. Cum 17 (Tex.Cr.App.) Evidence in a prosecution om 240 (Ky.) A wife given a divorce on the for unlawfully keeping and being concerned in ground of abandonment and cruel treatment keeping a bawdyhouse held sufficient to support and awarded the custody of small children held a conviction.—Thompson v. State, 179 S. W. 98. I entitled, in addition to an allowance for their support, to alimony in the sum of $150 per the petitioners.-Bottoms v. Borah, 179 S. W. year.-Goff v. :Goff, 179 S. W. 826.

996. Om 241 (Mo.App.). Under Rev. St. 1909, § 2376,

DRAMSHOPS. whether an award of alimony to the wife shall be in gross or a periodical allowance depends See Intoxicating Liquors. on the husband's financial ability.-Wright v. Wright, 179 S. W. 950.

DRINK. An award of alimony in monthly installments See Food, 25. of $100, instead of a gross sum of $7,500, held

Onn not an abuse of the discretion vested in the court by Rev. St. 1909, § 2376, where it ap

DRUNKENNESS. peared that the defendant husband was earn- See Carriers, em 284. ing $340 per month.-1d. Om 249 (Ky.) Notwithstanding Ky. St. § 2121,

DUE PROCESS OF LAW. and Civ. Code Prac. $ 425, did not authorize it, the court granting a divorce to the wife might See Constitutional Law, 283–296. order her to pay the amount expended by the husband in permanent improvements upon her

DUPLICITY. property.-Sandusky v. Sandusky, 179S, W. 415.

See Indictment and Information, Om 125. A husband who, under agreement with his wife for repayment out of rents, expended money

EASEMENTS. in permanent improvements upon her property, held entitled to recover in ,her suit for divorce

I. CREATION, EXISTENCE, AND the amount so spent.-Id.

TERMINATION. Om 285 (Mo.App.) An appeal from an order denying suit money in a divorce case will be em 17 (Ky.) A conveyance of a warehouse with considered, though the bill of exceptions in the appurtenances will not carry with it the right to principal case was not in the record and the use a private way over the grantor's land which printed abstract bad not been prepared, for at that time was not needed for plaintiff's full that is the principal purpose for which' suit enjoyment of the premises.-Kentucky Distillmoney is necessary.-Hall v. Hall

, 179 S. w. eries & Warehouse Co. v. Warwick Co., 179 S. 738.

W. 611. em On 286 (Ky.) Where, in a wife's action for din 18 (Ky.) Where, on conveyance of a ware

. vorce, evidence on issue of money wrongfully house surrounded on three sides by the grantor's withheld by husband is doubtful, the finding of land, a way over railroad tracks furnished acchancellor will not be disturbed. Hester v.cess to the entire premises, plaintiff, having Hester, 179 S. W. 451.

changed the construction of the premises, can

not claim as a way of necessity a passway to DOCKETS.

the rear portion of the warehouse.-Kentucky

Distilleries & Warehouse Co. v. Warwick Co., See Trial, 11.

179 S. W. 611.

Where plaintiff used way across railroad DOCTORS.

tracks, it cannot claim a way of necessity over

defendant's land which surrounded its property See Physicians and Surgeons.

on three sides on the ground that the way across

the tracks might be revoked.-Id. DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE.

II. EXTENT OF RIGHT, USE, AND See Criminal Law, 447.


61 (Ky.) In a suit to enjoin obstruction of

a way, evidence held to show that the prior See Divorce, O62; Venue, 22.

use of the way had only been permissive and

that it was not open to the public or a way of DOUBLE TAXATION.

necessity.-Kentucky Distilleries & Warehouse

Co. v. Warwick Co., 179 S. W. 611.
See Municipal Corporations, ww407.


See Carriers, 352-382.
See Curtesy: Eminent Domain, Cm157; Tax-
ation, om 866, 889.


See Pleading, m 8.
See Embezzlement, Om6.


Om 86 (Ky.) Plaintiffs in ejectment held not

entitled to recover without showing that defendI. ESTABLISHMENT AND MAIN

ants were occupying land within the exterior TENANCE.

lines of the patent under which they claimed,

and without an exclusion.–Tussey v. Hale, 179 Om 14 (Ark.) Jurisdictional notice not conform- S. W. 390. ing to map and report describing proposed drainage district, and not enabling owner to know IV. TRIAL, JUDGMENT, ENFORCEwhether his land was to be included, held to MENT OF JUDGMENT, AND invalidate all subsequent proceedings.-Paschal

REVIEW. v. Swepston, 179 S. W. 339.

Ono 122 (Mo.App.) A judgment in an action of

ejectment omitting any description of the premII. ASSESSMENTS AND SPECIAL

ises would not sustain an order of restitution for. TAXES.

the lot involved or for any lot, though it was Om 82 (Ark.) On evidence in a proceeding for not void and might have been amended.-Eaker the amendment of former orders relating to as- v. Harvey, 179 S. W. 985. sessments, held, that court could not say that the trial court erred in refusing to treat it as

ELECTION. establishing with sufficient certainty the fact

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]


Omw 6 (Mo.) Under Rev. St. 1909, $$ 4550, 4551,

a draft is not subject to embezzlement prior to See Municipal Corporations, On918.

delivery.-State v. Wilcox, 179 S. W. 482, 433. VI. NOMINATIONS AND PRIMARY

On9 (Ky.) Certification to sheriff for collection ELECTIONS.

of franchise tax due county from corporation

held necessary condition precedent to his emOm 146 (Ky.) Under the Primary Act, a nom- bezzlement thereof.—Commonwealth v. Brand, inee may create a vacancy by withdrawal even 179 S. W. 844. though he agrees to accept the nomination.-ell (Mo.) Conversion is any using or dealing Elswick v. Ratliff, 179 S. W. 11.

with the property of another which impliedly A nominee held not entitled to withdraw his or by its terms excludes the owner's dominion; resignation delivered to the county clerk after the word "imply" meaning it is “virtually init was accepted by the party authorities and volved or included; involved in substance; inanother selected.-Id.

ferential, tacitly conceded—the correlatie of exOm 156 (Ky.) Under Ky. St. 1915, $_1550, sub press or expressed."-State v. Wilcox, 179 S. W. sec. 26, nomination certificate of Republican 179. candidate for representative filed with secretary Can 23 (Mo.) In a prosecution for embezzlement of state October 4th held filed too late; the by a bank cashier, an instruction that the fact election being November 2d.-Dobbs v. Crecelius, that the proceeds of the check whereby the em179 S. W. 12.

bezzlement was consummated went to another Ky. St. 1915, $ 1550, subsec. 26, is mandatory did not constitute a defense was not erroneous.in character, and noncompliance deprives a nom- State v. Wilcox, 179 S. W. 479. inee of the right to have his name printed on the official ballot.-Id.

On28 (Ky.) An indictment held to charge con

version not of a note, or horse, but of money, IX. COUNT OF VOTES, RETURNS,

the proceeds of sale of a horse, giving in a AND CANVASS.

descriptive way its source.-Commonwealth v.

Holliday, 179 S. W. 235. On 260 (Ky.) Election commissioners cannot canvass questioned ballots unaccompanied by Cm38 (Ky.) In a prosecution of a sheriff for statement of whether and how counted, as re- of the county court during defendant s term

embezzling a county tax, testimony of the clerk quired by Ky. St. § 1482.-Graham v. Treadway, of office that the latter had failed to report 179 S. W. 1029.

collections as required by Ky. St. § 4147, was X. CONTESTS.

admissible.-Commonwealth v. Brand, 179 S.

W. 814. 269 (Tenn.) The Chancery Court has no ju

Testimony as to a receipt given the sheriff by risdiction of a bill brought to contest the elec- his deputy, as to the bandwriting of the retion of the one receiving the highest number of ceipt, who had given it, and ill feeling between votes, on the ground of his ineligibility, or to the deputy and the defendant growing out of declare the election void.-Hogan v. Hamilton the receipt, was inadmissible.-Id. County, 179 S. W. 128.

Pleadings of the sheriff's sureties' suit to remw280 (Ky.) Under Primary Election Law, cover sums they were required to pay for his $ 28, and Civ. Code Prac. $ 625, failure to give defalcations in office were irrelevant.-Id. notice of contest until nine days after the award The prosecution may prove that a demand of certificate of nomination held a jurisdiction- has been made by the proper person for the payal defect, so that the contest would be dis- ment by defendant of the money he is accused missed.-Edge v. Allen, 179 S. W. 212.

of embezzling.-Id. Cu 299 (Ky.) Questioned ballots unaccompanied

Evidence that defendant had arranged with by statement of whether and how counted, re- his deputy to take the former sheriff's books quired by Ky. St. § 1482, will be counted by and collect unpaid taxes, etc., held inadmissible. the court in election contest.-Graham v. Tread--Id. way, 179 S. W. 1029.

Om 39 (Ky.) In prosecution of sheriff for em

bezzlement, defendant's testimony that upon deELECTRICITY.

mand by the county for the tax he was acSee Contribution, m5; Municipal Corpora- he had not accounted for, he was financially un

cused of embezzling, but which he did not know tions, 682.

able to turn it over, held admissible.-CommonOm 4 (Ky.) A void ordinance granting to an wealth v. Brand, 179 S. W. 814. electric light and power company a franchise In prosecution of sheriff for embezzlement of held to give the company a license to use the a tax which he claimed he had no memory of streets, and a reasonable time within which to receiving, evidence that at the time of the reremove its pronerty.- City of Princeton

v.ceipt defendant suffered from his nerves and Princeton Electric Light & Power Co., 179 S. could not look after his office was admissible. W. 1074.

-Id. A city need not allow the use of its streets by em 39 (Mo.) In a prosecution for embezzlement a public service corporation without a franchise, by a bank cashier evidence of shortages in the merely because it' has entered into obligations bank's assets other than those resulting from the with citizens which it cannot perform without transaction counted on was admissible upon a franchise.-Id.

the question of fraudulent intent.-State v. WilOmo II (Ky.) One furnishing to a city, electric cox, 179 S. W. 479. light and power under a franchise void under Const. § 164, may not enforce collection there

EMBLEMENTS. for.-City of Princeton v. Princeton Electric Light & Power Co., 179 S. W. 1074.

See Life Estates, On 25. A city, paying for light furnished by an electric light company operating under a void fran

chise held not entitled to recover the sums paid.

See Railroads, 113.

See Officers, cm19, 35.

(A) Necessity and Sufficiency in General. EMBEZZLEMENT.

Om75 (Ark.) Const. art. 12, § 9, prohibiting ap

propriation of property until full compensation See Criminal Law, m371, 396, 448, 673; In- is made in money or secured, held not to apply dictment and Information, en 202.

to exercise of power of eminent domain by the

« 이전계속 »