« 이전계속 »
self from the attack of all.--Welborn v. State,
(E) Weight and Sufficiency. 179 S. W. 1179.
On 228 (Ark.) Evidence as to circumstances unOm 116 (Tex.Cr.App.) Defendant had right to der which deceased was called from his house shoot decedent attacking him if from his view and as to the subsequent finding of his dead point he was in danger of death or serious in- body held to warrant a finding that there was jury, whether other parties, decedent's friends, an unlawful killing.-Johnson v. State, 179 S. had anything to do with the trouble, or when-W. 361. ever they came into it.-Welborn v. State, 179 Cm 233 (Tex.Cr.App.) Proof of motive is not S. W. 1179. It is defendant's viewpoint, and not the jury's, Rea v. State, 179 S. W. 706.
essential to support a conviction for murder. as they subsequently see a homicide, from which the appearance of matters, as giving de-em234 (Tex.Cr.App.) Circumstantial evidence fendant reasonable cause to believe he was in in a prosecution for homicide held to support a danger of injury, is to be estimated.-Id.
verdict of guilty.-Rea v. State, 179 S. W. 706. Omw 122 (Tex.Cr.App.) Where accused shot the ww236 (Tex.Cr. App.) In a prosecution for murdeceased, who was attacking defendant's father, der, evidence held to show that decedent, a he was guilty of no offense if it reasonably three year old girl, received fatal injury when appeared to him at the time he shot that the flung into an adjoining room by defendant.life of his father was in danger, or that he was Galvan v. State, 179 S. W. 875. in danger of suffering serious bodily injury.- O 250 (Tex.Cr.App.) In a prosecution for Brod v. State, 179 S. W. 1189.
murder against a peace officer, evidence held to
sustain conviction of manslaughter.-Moser v. VI. INDICTMENT AND INFORMA- State, 179 S. W. 104. TION.
Om253 (Ark.) Evidence held to warrant a conOm 142 (Ark.) An indictment charging one kind viction of murder in the first degree.-Owens v. of first degree murder will not support an in- State, 179 S. W. 1014. struction and conviction on another kind, where Om 257 (Tex.Cr.App.) Evidence held to support the elements of the two are essentially different. a conviction for assault with intent to murder. -Sheppard v. State, 179 S. W. 168.
-Freeman v. State, 179 S. W. 1157.
VIII. TRIAL. (A) Presumptions and Burden of Proof.
(B) Questions for Jury. Om 144 (Ark.) Notwithstanding Kirby's Dig. 8 Cm 268 (Ark.) Under Kirby's Dig. 8 1765, as to 1765, the burden on the whole case on a trial burden of showing mitigating circumstances, for homicide is on the state, and mitigating where unlawful killing was established, and decircumstances raising a reasonable doubt re- fendant admitted “knifing” deceased, directed quire an acquittal, by whichever party proved. verdict held properly refused.-Johnson v. State, -Johnson v. State, 179 S. W. 361.
179 S. W. 361. (B) Admissibility in General.
On 281 (Tex.Cr.App.) In a prosecution for
homicide, evidence that accused was a prinem 157 (Tex.Cr. App.) Evidence of defendant's cipal held sufficient to go to the jury.-Taylor difficulty with a person who had won his money v. State, 179 S. W. 113. and whom he probably intended to kill was admissible to show his state of mind.-Williams v.
(C) Instructions. State, 179 S. W. 710.
C290 (Tex.Cr.App.) Instructions in prosecuOm 163 (Tex.Cr.App.) In a prosecution for tion for wife murder by poison held to sufficientuxoricide, defendant's evidence of his kindness ly require the state to prove that arsenic was to his children held inadmissible, since his kind the poison used.-Rea v. State, 179 S. W. 706. ness to them was not in issue.-Rea v. State, cum 291 (Tex.Cr.App.) Evidence in a prosecu179 S. W. 706.
tion for wife murder by poison held not_to reOm 164 (Tex.Cr.App.) Where defendant con- quire a charge on the issue of suicide.-Rea v. tended that deceased might have committed State, 179 S. W. 706. suicide on account of ill health, testimony of an mw 300 (Ark.) Instruction that defendant could employer that he lost no time while working not plead self-defense if he was the aggressor for him held admissible.-Hand v. State, 179 or voluntarily entered into the difficulty held S. W. 1155.
to properly present state's theory, and not erOm 166 (Tex.Cr.App.) Evidence of defendant's roneous for failure to charge as to defendant's difficulty with a person who had won his mon- withdrawal from the difficulty.-Yancey v. ey and whom he probably intended to kill was State, 179 S. W. 352. admissible to show his motive.-Williams v. Om 300 (Ark.) Instruction on self-defense in State. 179 S. W. 710.
language of Kirby's Dig. § 1798, and another Om 166 (Tex.Cr.App.) Evidence as to defend- instruction given at defendant's request held not ant's false statements before deceased's death in conflict, but to correctly declare the law.that he was a millionaire, and after his death Johnson v. State, 179 S. W. 361. that he was a pauper, and that she had a large enn 300 (Ky.) Where the evidence shows that amount of money in a bank, held admissible.- deceased was shot from behind, precluding the Hand v. State, 179 S. W. 1155.
possibility of altercation or struggle, failure to Om 170 (Ark.) In a prosecution for homicide, instruct on self-defense and manslaughter held evidence that shoes of the same last as those not error.—Wilson v. Commonwealth, 179 S. W. sold to accused, but only a little shorter, fitted 237. tracks at the place of the crime, except as to mw 300 (Tex.Cr.App.) Failure to instruct that length, is admissible.-Owens v. State, 179 S. two witnesses, when attacked by deceased, to W. 1014. om 174 (Ky.) Letter by one defendant, written not bound to retreat, held not erroneous as not after commission of crime and threatening to called for by evidence.-Moser v. State, 179 kill the jailer, held not admissible upon joint S. W. 104. trial.- \Vilson v. Commonwealth, 179 S. W. Failure to charge on law of retreat as applied 237.
to defendant peace officer and two brothers Om 181 (Tex.Cr. App.) In a trial for murder, who were being attacked by deceased when the contents of letter of deceased in reply to defend officer came up, the question being inapplicable ant's wife held inadmissible, but that deceased to any theory of the case, held not erroneous. received a letter from her and the registry re- -Id. ceipt for it to which his answer was in reply 300 (Tex.Cr.App.) In a trial for murder, was admissible.- Vollintine v. State, 179 S. W. instruction that defendant in self-defense might 1251
Husband and Wife
him at the time and place to be necessary to ( in common.-Bennett v. Hutchens, 179 S. W. protect himself against unlawful violence was 629. erroneous.—Vollintine v. State, 179 S. W. 108. It is immaterial that a deed to a husband and
Where the evidence in a trial for murder rais- wife does not show their relation, or the ined the issue of self-defense based on threats, tention of their grantor. on its face, for their the refusal to submit it was error.-Id.
estate is required by the common law to be On 300 (Tex.Cr. App.) In prosecution for by the entireties.-Id. homicide, held, that' a charge on self-defense Shannon's Code, $ 3677, does not abolish esshould have been given.-Taylor v. State, 179 tates by the entireties.-Id. S. W. 113.
On 19 (Tex.Civ.App.) A wife, who purchased One charged as principal of the party who goods which were necessaries for her own use, actually fired the fatal shot held not guilty, was personally liable for their value.-Tramwhere he or the actual perpetrator reasonably mell v. Neiman Marcus Co., 179 S. W. 271. believed it was necessary in self-defense.—Id. Om 2334 (Tex.Civ.App.) In an action by an auen 300 (Tex.Cr. App.) In prosecution for tomobile dealer for the value of a car sold by one manslaughter, instruction held erroneous as im- representing himself as agent, evidence held to properly presenting issue of self-defense.-Wel- warrant finding of agency in plaintiff's wife to born v. State, 179 S. W. 1179.
employ salesman.-Holmes v. Tyner, 179 S. W. 305 (Tex.Cr.App.) In a prosecution for 887. homicide, a charge on the question of principals held erroneous under the circumstances.- IV. DISABILITIES AND PRIVILEGES Taylor v. State, 179 S. W. 113.
OF COVERTURE. Ow309 (Tex.Cr.App.) Instruction that adul
(C) Contracts. tery of defendant's wife with deceased would 87 (Tex.Civ.App.) A married woman cannoť reduce the killing to manslaughter. held not, even with the consent of her husband, legalerroneous as not fairly presenting the issues ly bind herself as surety on an appeal bond, and made by the evidence.—Mitchell v. State, 179 à bond on which she is a surety may be reS. W. 116.
An instruction that adultery with the wife fused.-Wilson v. Dearborn, 179 S. W. 1102. may be adequate cause which may reduce a
V. WIFE'S SEPARATE ESTATE. homicide to manslaughter should be given if there is evidence to support it.-Id.
(A) What Constitutes.
Om 113 (Tenn.) Laws 1913, c. 26, do not affect X. APPEAL AND ERROR.
estates of married women held at the time of its C340 (Tex.Cr.App.) Where jury assessed passage.-Bennett v. Hutchens, 179 S. W. 629. lowest punishment for manslaughter, charge on murder and manslaughter held, in view of the
VI. ACTIONS. verdict not so general as to mislead jury.-Lock-w205 (Tenn.) Common-law
w205 (Tenn.) Common-law rule that one ett v. State, 179 S. W. 716.
spouse cannot sue the other for tort committed On 341 (Tex.Cr. App.) In trial for murder, in- during the marriage held not abrogated by struction on manslaughter that, if defendant Shannon's Code, § 6470, or Pub. Acts 1913, c. believed that deceased had improper relations 26.--Lillienkamp v. Rippetoe, 179 S. W. 628. with his wife, it would be adequate cause, was om 209 (Tenn.) Notwithstanding the Married sufficient, and failure to further instruct that Women's Act, a husband may, as at common his belief of such relations would be real to law, recover for loss of the services of his wife him whether such relations existed or not, was by reason of her personal injuries.--City of not reversible error.-Vollintine v. State, 179 Chattanooga v. Carter, 179 S. W. 127. S. W. 108.
mm 235 (Tex.Civ.App.) In action for alleged
necessaries, instruction to find the goods to be HOSPITALS.
necessaries as against the wife held calculated
to impress the jury that they were necessaries See Taxation, Om 241.
as against the husband.–Trammell y. Neiman
Marcus Co., 179 S. W. 271.
Submission of issue whether goods were nec
essaries, considering husband's financial circumSee Negligence, C83; Railroads, 376, stances and station in life at "and prior" to 390; Street Railroads, Omw 103.
the time of the purchase, held erroneous.-Id.
In action for necessaries, in which plaintiff
pleaded estoppel, lield, that question whether HUSBAND AND WIFE.
the husband knew the goods were being charged See Bigamy; Curtesy; Death, em 31; Descent to him should have been submitted to the jury.
-Id. and Distribution, Ow52; Disorderly House, On9; Divorce; Evidence, Om 248; Fraudu
VII. COMMUNITY PROPERTY. lent Conveyances, Cu299, 300; Homestead; Marriage; Witnesses, Om60.
On 257 (Tex.Civ.App.) Rev. St. 1911, art. 4621,
as amended by Acts 330 Leg. c. 32, $ 1 (Vernon's I. MUTUAL RIGHTS, DUTIES, AND
Sayles' Ann. Civ. St. 1914, art. 4621), and Rev. LIABILITIES.
St. 1911, art. 4622 (Vernon's Sayles' Ann. Civ.
St. 1911, art. 4022), do not change the rule that Om6 (Ark.) Where one conveys his property property acquired by the use of the wife's septo deprive an intended husband or wife of rights arate property becomes that of the community. arising from martiage, equity will avoid such --First Nat. Bank of Plainview v. McWhorter, conveyance, or compel the grantee to hold the 179 S. W. 1147. property in trust for the defrauded husband or wife.—West v. West, 179 S. W. 1017.
IX. ABANDONMENT. Om II (Ky.) Under the law in 1861, before the Om 302 (Tex.Cr.App.) It is not essential to the Married Women's Act of 1894, a husband, tak- right to prosecute for abandonment after seing his wife's personal property and using it in duction and marriage that the marriage shall the purchase of a farm, and taking title in her have taken place after indictment.--Coleman v. name with reversion to his heirs, thereby re- State, 179 S. W. 1172. duced it to possession.-Neel's Ex’r v. Noland's Ow313 (Tex.Cr. App.) In a prosecution
for Heirs, 179 S. W. 430.
abandonment after seduction and marriage, Om 14 (Tenn.) A conveyance to husband and held error to exclude testimony of a witness wife creates an estate by the entireties, and not that he saw a woman, whom he believed to be prosecutrix, and a third person in compromis- INCONSISTENT STATEMENTS. ing acts, where there was evidence that her child resembled the third person rather than See Witnesses, 379, 396. defendant.-Coleman v. State, 179 S. W. 1172. Defendant's evidence that he married pros
INDEMNITY. ecutrix under duress, and almost immediately sued to annul the marriage for duress, was ad- See Guaranty; Mechanics' Liens, 313. missible to rcbut the presumption arising from On 6 (Tex. Civ.App.) Where indorsers of a note the marriage that he was guilty of seduction. paid it, they were entitled to judgment upon an -Id.
indemnity note given them by the maker and A decree divorcing defendant from prosecu- to a foreclosure of the trust deed securing it. trix, not being binding on the state, was not ad--Grubbs v. Eddleman, 179 S. W. 91. missible in evidence.-Id.
INDIANS. HYPOTHETICAL QUESTIONS.
Omw 35 (Mo.App.) Under Act Cong. March 1, See Evidence, 553.
1907, giving Indian agents the authority con
ferred by Rev. St. U. S. 2140 (U. S. Comp. IDENTIFICATION.
St. 1913, § 4141), Indian agent held authorized
to seize liquors in wareroom of defendant carSee Evidence, Om459.
rier in Kansas which he was informed were to IDENTITY.
be introduced into the Indian country.-Danci
ger v. Atchison, T. & S. F. Ry. Co., 179 S. W. See Homicide, Cm170; Names, cm14.
800. ILLEGITIMATE CHILDREN. INDICTMENT AND INFORMATION. See Bastards.
See Arson, on 25; Criminal Law, Om170;
Disorderly House, Om 12; False Pretenses, ILLUSORY APPOINTMENT
38; Forgery, 28-34; Homicide, om
142; Incest, m10; Infants, em 12; DOCTRINE.
toxicating Liquors, em 223; Larceny, On 40; See Wills, Om692.
Libel and Slander, Om152; Records, 17.
II. FINDING AND FILING OF INDICTIMPANELING JURY.
MENT OR PRESENTMENT. See Jury, 146.
Cuma 14 (Tex.Cr.App.) The fact that a substitut
ed copy was not the indictment of a grand jury IMPEACHMENT.
was no ground why accused could not be tried See_Appeal and Error, Om667; Witnesses, fon such copy.—Bennett v. State, 179 s. w.
713. On 311-396.
III. FORMAL REQUISITES OF IN. IMPLIED AGENCY.
DICTMENT. See Principal and Agent, Om 14.
34 (Tex.Cr. App.) The indorsement of names
of witnesses upon the back of an indictment for IMPLIED REPEAL.
murder after its return into court was not an
alteration invalidating it.-Galvan v. State, 179 See Statutes, 161.
S. W. 875.
V. REQUISITES AND SUFFICIENCY
OF ACCUSATION. See False Imprisonment; Habeas Corpus.
mm 110 (Ark.) Indictment for keeping a gamIMPROVEMENT DISTRICTS. bling table, in the words of the statute, held
to charge a public offense, under Kirby's Dig. S See Municipal Corporations, 265, 747. 1732.-Riley v. State, 179 S. W. 661.
Omw 110 (Tex.Cr.App.) An indictment for arson IMPROVEMENTS.
following Pen. Code 1911, art. 1200 et seq., See Life Estates, ww17; Mechanics' Liens; held sufficient.-Tinker v. State, 179 S. W. 572.
Municipal Corporations, C265-567; Ten Cow 110 (Tex.Cr.App.) In view of Rev. St. arts. ancy in Common, Om29.
7435, 7416, Code Čr. Proc. arts. 453, 460, 464,
and Pen. Code, art. 614, an information charge IMPUTED NEGLIGENCE.
ing sale of intoxicants without a license, fol
lowing article 611, held sufficient, while not See Negligence, 93, 96.
averring the particular place in the county or
that accused was licensed to sell elsewhere. INCEST.
Winterman v. State, 179 S. W. 704. ww10 (Ark.) An indictment stating in tech-cm 121 (Ky.) An indictment being too general, nical language that adultery was committed by and not sufficiently describing the thing condefendant, a married man, with his niece, sut- verted, bill of particulars is the remedy-Comficiently alleged the offense of incest.-Carmen monwealth v. Holliday, 179 S. W. 235. v. State, 179 S. W. 183.
Om 122 (Tex.Cr.App.) A complaint charging an An indictment for incest which failed to al- assault with “knucks, commonly known as lege that defendant was a married man when he brass knucks,” and an information charging committed the adultery with his niece was in the assault with "knucks," do not show a fatal sufficient to sustain a conviction.-Id.
variance.-Chisom v. State, 179 S. W. 103. Om 13 (Ark.) On trial for incest, conduct and acts prior to period of limitation held ad- VI. JOINDER OF PARTIES, OFFENSES, missible to show_relations of parties.-Carmen
AND COUNTS, DUPLICITY, V. State, 179 S. W. 183.
AND ELECTION. Bond and orders in bastardy proceeding in 125 (Ky.) Considering the accusative and which defendant admitted that he was the fa- descriptive parts of an indictment, held, it was ther of the child held admissible.-Id.
not duplicitous, but only charged the offense On 14 (Ark.) On a trial for incest, evidence denounced by Ky. St. § 1358a, and not that held sufficient to support a verdict of guilty.- denounced by section 1202.-Commonwealth v. 1253
Om 128 (Tex.Cr. App.) Indictment charging in not raised in the circuit court.-Talbott v. Comtwo counts theft from two persons and theft monwealth, 179 S. W. 621. from one of such persons held good, and not to charge a felony, though aggregate value of prop
IV. CONTRACTS. erty, as stated in both counts, was $55.-Whit- ww57 (Mo.App.) Sale of small value from field v. States, 179 S. W. 558.
stock of drugs, and retention of possession of VII. MOTION TO QUASH OR DISMISS, store until trial of action for rescission of conVII. MOTION TO QUASH OR DISMISS, tract, whereby plaintiff, when an infant, had AND DEMURRER.
purchased the stock, held not a ratification of. Om 133 (Tex.Cr.App.) An indictment cannot be such contract.—Moser v. Renner, 179 S. W. 970. shown to be defective by evidence, but is tested m58 (Mo.App.) Action for decree, rescinding as a pleading under the law applicable.-Tinker contract entered into during minority, and reV. State, 179 S. W. 572.
quiring defendants to surrender the consideraOm 137 (Ark.) Disqualification of grand juror tion paid, commenced within proper time, held held not to affect indictment on motion to quash in itself a disaffirmance_of such contract.under the express provisions of Kirby's Dig. 8 Moser v. Renner, 179 S. W. 970. 2245.-Calloway v. State, 179 S. W. 356.
Action for rescission of contract of sale and @mw 137 (Tex.Cr.App.) Where an indictment was cancellation of the several notes secured by in two counts, and one of them was good, there chattel mortgage held maintainable for plainwas no error in denying a motion to 'quash, tiff's protection on ground of avoiding a mulwhere the conviction was general.-Hyroop v. tiplicity of suits on the notes.-Id. State, 179 S. W. 878.
Plaintiff, who while a minor purchased the Om 137 (Tex.Cr.App.) That
capital stock of a drug company which was
an indictment charges the same offense charged in another in action after majority to rescind sale, held not
, ed is not ground for quashing the indictment. required to make tender of stock to himself, as
representing the corporation.-Id. -Park v. State, 179 S. W. 1152. Om 137 (Tex.Cr.App.) That an indictment for knowingly permitting his house to be used for
INHERITANCE TAX, purposes of prostitution did not put defendant's See Taxation, Omw 860–895. name after the words "upon their oaths in said court present that, *
or that it did not allege particularly where the premises were
INJUNCTION. located in the county, held not grounds for See Courts, 189; Basements, cm 61; Exequashing.-Lawson v. State, 179 S. W. 1186.
cution, on 172; Highways, Omw 64; Municipal Om 138 (Tex.Cr.App.) Overruling of motion con
Corporations, m 697; Trial, 11. taining exception to indictment on ground that it had been altered after return into court held 1. NATURE AND GROUNDS IN GENproper.-Galvan v. State, 179 S. W. 875.
ERAL. O 147 (Ky.) An indictment being too general,
(B) Grounds of Relief. and not sufficiently describing the thing converted, bill of particulars, and not demurrer, is 9 (Tenn.) An injunction will not be granted the remedy.—Commonwealth v. Holliday, 179 to protect an alleged right, except upon a clear S. W. 235.
case.- Memphis St. Ry. Co. v. Rapid Transit
Co., 179 S. W. 635.
II. SUBJECTS OF PROTECTION AND
RELIEF. m202 (Mo.) An information for embezzlement (D) Corporate Franchises, Management, not assailed before the trial held good after ver
and Dealings. dict, under Rev. St. 1909, § 5115.-State v. Om64 (Tenn.) The franchise of a street railway Wilcox, 179 S. W. 479.
company is a property right, which enables it to
maintain an action for injunction against comINDORSEMENT.
peting carriers, who have not been granted simi
lar rights by legislative sanction, and to that exSee Indictment and Information, 34.
tent its franchise is exclusive. -Memphis St. Ry.
Co. v. Rapid Transit Co., 179 S. W. 635.
Ow65 (Tenn.) Where the city council fails to See Death, ww44; Equity, Cm 39; Guardian act under a statute authorizing it to regulate jitand Ward; Judges, Cm 22; Jury, Cm14; bill of the street railway company, since its rights
ney busses, the jitneys may be enjoined on the Municipal Corporations, em 762 763; Neg- may be materially invaded through failure of ligence, On96; Parent and Child.
the council to act.-Memphis St. Ry. Co. v. II. CUSTODY AND PROTECTION.
Rapid Transit Co., 179 S. W. 635. em 12 (Tenn.) Laws 1911, c. 58, declaring in compel a grantee of a franchise, where there
Omw 67 (Ky.) Citizens of a municipality may fants violating the criminal laws delinquent are provisions therein for their benefit, to exerchildren who may be committed to the state reformatory, held not penal, but reformatory, and ton Electric Light & Power Co., 179 S. W.
cise the franchise.-City of Princeton ý. Princecontrary to Const. art1§ 14, prohibiting 1074. prosecution except by presentment, indictment, or impeachment.-Childress v. State, 179 S. W. (E) Public Officers and Boards and Mu643.
nicipalities. Om 13 (Ark.) Father, owning pool tables, who m80 (Ky.) Precinct election officers can be employed his son, under 15 years, to operate compelled to perform the omitted duty of rethe pool room under an agreement that the turning statement with contested ballots shov boy should have half the proceeds, held not ing whether and how counted.-Graham guilty of a violation of Acts 1911, p. 63, § 1.- Treadway, 179 S. W. 1029. Halliday v. State, 179 S. W. 1004.
Mandatory injunction is proper remedy to reOmw 18 (Ky.) Under Ky. St. $ 331e, subsec. 5, quire performance of ministerial duties by preheld, that circuit court had no jurisdiction of cinct election officers.-Id. juvenile delinquent of 16 who had not been The exercise of discretion by election officers brought before the county court, which want will not be controlled by mandatory injunction. of jurisdiction might be raised on appeal, though '-Id.
III. INSURANCE AGENTS AND (H) Criminal Acts, Conspiracies, and
(A) Agency for Insurer. Omw 105 (Tenn.) Equity cannot enjoin criminal proceedings under a statute, though it be charg-Om74 (Mo.App.) A contract between an ined that the act is invalid and that a multiplicity surance company, its general agent and the genof actions will result in irreparable damage, eral manager of its burglary and surety departwhen complainant's defense at law is adequate ments, held several and not joint.–United -Alexander v. Elkins, 179 S. W. 310.
States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Ridge, 179 An equity court will enjoin the father of a S. W. 791. girl and a justice of the peace from indulging
Whether a contract between an insurance in prosecutions of the girl's husband for non-company and its agents creates a joint or sevsupport, under a statute declared unconstitu- eral agency does not depend upon the number tional by the Supreme Court, calculated to con- of agents contracted with nor on the form of tinue until such husband paid money for the the agreement.-Id. support of his wife.-Id.
Om76 (Tex. Civ.App.) Insurance agent's testi
mony that his authority had not terminated III. ACTIONS FOR INJUNCTIONS.
when he issued a policy held to support finding Om 109 (Tex.Civ.App.) In suit to enjoin tres- for plaintiff, though circumstantial evidence passes, held, that defendant might assert own- tended to show that it had been terminated.ership in himself and set up a claim for dam- International Fire Insurance Co. v. Black, 179 ages for being unlawfully dispossessed by plain- S. W. 534. tiff.-Harper v. Stewart, 179 S. W. 277. ww78 (Tex. Civ.App.) Person dealing with inIV. PRELIMINARY AND INTERLOCU- of authority held entitled to assume that he was
surance agent without knowledge of limitation TORY INJUNCTIONS.
authorized to issue particular policy and com(A) Grounds and Proceedings to Procure. pany was estopped to assert the contrary.-InEww136 (Tex.Civ.App.) The court, in granting a ternational Fire Insurance Co. v. Black, 179 S. temporary injunction should require a case of W. 534. probable right and probable danger to the right
Notwithstanding secretary's testimony as to without the injunction.-Whitaker v. Hill, 179 custom, court held entitled to determine terriS. W. 539.
torial extent of insurance agent's authority
from correspondence, and it did not limit him (B) Continuing, Modifying, Vacating, or to a particular county.-Id. Dissolving.
Om79 (Mo.App.) A contract between an insurOm 163 (Tex.Civ.App.) The court, in refusing to ance company, its general agent and the gendissolve a temporary injunction, should require eral manager of its burglary and surety departa case of probable right and probable danger ments, held not terminated by the retirement of to the right without the injunction-Whitaker the general manager.- United States Fidelity & v. Hill, 179 S. W. 539.
Guaranty Co. v. Ridge, 179 S. W. 791. Ouw 164 (Mo.App.) A United States Circuit @ww83 (Ark.) Bond of local agent of insurance Court entering a temporary injunction order in company held not to bind himself and sureties force only "until the further order of the court to reimburse the company for losses occurring had inherent power at any time to vacate or set on policies issued on prohibited risks by such aside such order.—Danciger V. American Ex- local agent.-Security Ins. Co. v. Jaggers, 179 press Co., 179 S. W. 797.
S. W. 1008.
ww93 (Ark.) A fire policy, payable to mortINSANE PERSONS.
gagee as interest might appear, held not void
merely because, unknown to insurer, its agent See Criminal Law, Om 570.
was president of the mortgagee.—Milwaukee
Mechanics' Ins. Co. v. Fuquay, 179 S. W. 497. INSOLVENCY. See Corporations, mm553-566.
IV. INSURABLE INTEREST.
Om 114 (Ky:) Where deceased procured an acciINSPECTION.
dent policy and paid all the premiums, hell, that See Insurance, 549; Master and Servant, due under the policy, though she had no insura
the beneficiary named was entitled to the amount On 124.
ble interest in deceased's life.-Allen's Adm'r v. INSTRUCTIONS.
Pacific Mut. Life Ins. Co., 179 S. W. 581.
V. THE CONTRACT IN GENERAL.
(A) Nature, Requisites, and Validity.
Om 131 (Ky.) A valid and enforceable oral conSee Appeal and Error, cum 909; Constitutional tract of insurance may be made between inLaw, 206, 229, 283; Evidence, Ow128; sured and the company, or between him and its Judgment, C559; Justices of the Peace, authorized agent.--Bracken County Ins. Co. v. wwu8; Pleading, w236, 433; Principal and Murray, 179 S. W. 842. Agent, m143; Taxation, Cw113, 387; Trial, em 136 (Mo. App.) Insurance company held not On191, 296.
liable to beneficiary on life policy undelivered II. INSURANCE COMPANIES.
to insured before his death, where the negotia
tions provided that there should be no contract (B) Mutual Companies.
until the policy had been delivered to insured Om 55 (Ky.) Person held not to become member in good health.-Yount v. Prudential Life Ins. of co-operative insurance company by signing Co., 179 S. W. 749. applicatio notwithstanding Ky. St. $ 702, and m141 (Mo. App.) Actual manual delivery of life hence agreement that insurance should be in policy made a condition precedent to liability force from the date of the application was in- by the terms of the insurance contract, as emvalid.-Bracken County Ins. Co. y. Murray, 179 bodied in the application, may be waived by the S. W. 842.
insurer.-Yount v. Prudential Life Ins. Co., 179 57 (Ky.) There could be no valid contract
S. W. 749. of insurance between a co-operative or assessment insurance company and a person not a
(B) Construction and Operation. member of the company.-Bracken County Ins. Om 146 (Mo.App.) All doubts appearing on the