ÆäÀÌÁö À̹ÌÁö
PDF
ePub

I. NATURE, ISSUANCE, REQUISITES,

AND VALIDITY.

PROVINCE OF COURT AND JURY.

See Criminal Law,
199.

737-764; Trial, 191

PROXIMATE CAUSE.

C6 (Tenn.) Under Shannon's Code, §§ 4495,
4589, process to bring in defendant after an
amendment substituting plaintiff as administra-
tor, instead of plaintiff in his own name, was See Railroads, 389, 425.
not required, and a notification by the court's
order was sufficient.-Studer v. Roberts, 179 S.
W. 131.

[blocks in formation]

PUBLICATION.

See Municipal Corporations, 302, 683;
Wills, 119.

PUBLIC DEBT.

See Counties, 165; Municipal Corporations, mm 871.

PUBLIC DOCUMENTS.

3 (Ky.) The writ of prohibition may be is- See Evidence, 366, 383. sued by a circuit court against an inferior court, or by an appellate court against a circuit court,

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS.

where the writ is the only adequate remedy to See Municipal Corporations, 265-567.
which the party applying therefor can resort.
-Speckert v. Ray, 179 S. W. 592.

10 (Ky.) The writ of prohibition may be issued by a circuit court against an inferior court, or by an appellate court against a circuit court, where the inferior or circuit court is attempting to act out of jurisdiction.-Speckert v. Ray,

179 S. W. 592.

12 (Tex. Civ.App.) Prohibition to prevent one district court from enjoining a judgment of another, affirmed by the Court of Civil Appeals, will not, in view of Rev. St. 1911, arts, 4643, 4653, be denied, because the court hearing the injunction should properly administer the law on the facts.-Cattlemens Trust Co. of Ft. Worth v. Willis, 179 S. W. 1115.

II. JURISDICTION, PROCEEDINGS,
AND RELIEF.

18 (Mo.App.) Act of circuit court, on motion for order against justice of the peace commanding correction of entries of judgment, held an assertion of jurisdiction, so that, if it was without jurisdiction, a preliminary rule in prohibition was not prematurely issued.-State ex rel. Gardiner v. Wurdeman, 179 S. W. 964.

PROMISE OF MARRIAGE.

See Breach of Marriage Promise.

PROMISSORY NOTES.

See Bills and Notes.

PROPERTY.

See Appeal and Error, 493; Fixtures.

PROSTITUTION.

(Tex.Cr.App.) Under Pen. Code 1911, art.

PUBLIC LANDS.

III. DISPOSAL OF LANDS OF THE
STATES.

173 (Tex.) Under Rev. St. 1911, art. 5423, held, it is insufficient for forfeiture of public school lands sold, for default in interest, to indorse, "Land forfeited," on the purchaser's obligation, without an entry on his account.Chambers v. Robison, 179 S. W. 123.

178 (Tex. Civ.App.) Public land awarded to a purchaser in accordance with the statute is the subject of sale.-Hollis v. Myers, 179 S. W. 57.

Failure to file conveyance by purchaser of public land in General Land Office held not to affect grantee's title, and if original purchaser obtains a patent, the legal title inures to the benefit of his grantee.-Id.

Grantee of original settler on public land, who purchased with knowedge of former conveyance, held to acquire no greater right by obtaining a patent than the settler would have obtained.-Id.

PUBLIC NUISANCE.

See Nuisance, 65, 72.

PUBLIC POLICY.

See Contracts, 108.

PUBLIC SCHOOLS.

See Schools and School Districts.

PUBLIC SERVICE CORPORATIONS. See Carriers; Electricity; Gas; Railroads; Street Railroads; Telegraphs and Telephones.

PUBLIC USE.

498, providing that it shall be unlawful to in- See Eminent Domain.
vite, solicit, or procure any female to have un-
lawful sexual intercourse, mere solicitation com-
pletes the offense.-Denman v. State, 179 S. W.
120.

4 (Tex.Cr.App.) In a prosecution for soliciting a female to illicit sexual intercourse, an offense denounced by Pen. Code 1911, art. 498, evidence held sufficient to support a conviction. -Denman v. State, 179 S. W. 120.

4 (Tex.Cr.App.) In a prosecution against defendant for unlawfully giving the name of his wife to another for the purpose of enabling the latter to have sexual intercourse with her, evidence held sufficient to sustain a conviction.Fletcher v. State, 179 S. W. 879.

PROTEST.

QUALIFICATIONS.

See Officers, 19, 35.

QUIETING TITLE.

II. PROCEEDINGS AND RELIEF.

44 (Ark.) In action to quiet, title, the defendant, claiming under a decree of divorce from plaintiff's grantor and asserting that plaintiff's deed had been made in fraud of her marital rights, had the burden of proving it, since fraud is never presumed.-West v. West, 179 S. W. 1017.

In action to quiet title as against the claim of defendant under a decree of divorce from plaintiff's grantor, and asserting that plaintiff's deed

held insufficient to sustain a decree for the de- I mon law, the absolute liability imposed by secfendant.-Id.

QUOTIENT VERDICT.

See Criminal Law, 866.

RAILROAD COMMISSION.

See Carriers, 13.

RAILROADS.

See Agriculture, 8; Appeal and Error,
1070; Carriers; Commerce, 27; Consti-
tutional Law, 241; Estoppel, 93; False
Imprisonment, 15; Master' and Servant.
Imprisonment, 15; Master and Servant,
112, 113, 198; Mines and Minerals,
105; Pleading, 369; Receivers, 69;
Statutes, 47; Street Railroads; Subscrip-
tions, 10, 12, 18; Trial, 250, 251.
I. CONTROL AND REGULATION IN
GENERAL.

9 (Ark.) Order of the Railroad Commission, based on petition signed by 17 corporations, held invalid, as not in compliance with Acts 1907, p. 357, § 1, providing that the petition must be signed by 15 citizens.-St. Louis & S. F. R. Co. v. State, 179 S. W. 342.

Corporations held not to be citizens, within Acts 1907, p. 357, § 1, in the absence of any provision fixing the method of corporate assent. -Id.

tions 1575 and 1576 did not apply.-Whittaker v. Louisville & N. R. Co., 179 S. W. 140.

344 (Tenn.) Count in action for injury at railroad crossing, brought under Shannon's Code, 1574, subsec. 4, not alleging that the train struck the plaintiff, was under the common law, and the absolute liability imposed by sections 1575 and 1576 did not apply.-Whittaker v. Louisville & N. R. Co., 179 S. W. 140.

350 (Tenn.) In an action for personal injury at a crossing brought under Shannon's Code, § 1574, subsec. 4, held on the evidence that it was for the jury to say whether plaintiff was negligent in jumping from the wagon instead of trusting her safety to the speed of the horses.-Whittaker v. Louisville & N. R. Co., 179 S. W. 140.

351 (Tenn.) In action for personal injury at railroad crossing, brought under Shannon's Code, § 1574, subsec. 4, instruction as to common-law duty of railroad to avoid accident held proper.-Whittaker v. Louisville & N. R. Co., 179 S. W. 140.

[blocks in formation]

372 (Tenn.) Railroad employés held not reVI. CONSTRUCTION, MAINTENANCE, quired to slacken speed of train when approachAND EQUIPMENT. ing a curve though the curve be wholly or part

97 (Ky.) A railroad company is a neces- ly in a cut or hidden from view by another sary party to a proceeding to change the loca- train.-Cincinnati, N. O. & T. P. Ry. Co. v. tion of a highway so as to abolish a grade cross-Wright, 179 S. W. 641.

ing over its right of way and relocate the cross-376 (Ky.) A pedestrian held a trespasser ing at another spot as an overhead crossing. on railroad track entitled to demand that those Carrick v. Garth, 179 S. W. 609. in charge of trains use all reasonable means to avoid injuring him after discovering his peril.Cincinnati, N. O. & T. P. Ry. Co. v. Jones' Adm'r, 179 S. W. 851.

113 (Ky.) Where a railroad company builds its line on the right of way purchased from a landowner, it is liable to the landowner for damages to his remaining land only when guilty of negligence in construction.-Roberts v. Sandy Valley & Elkhorn Ry. Co., 179 S. W.

228.

Where a railroad engineer discovers a trespasser on the track in a position of peril, and the distance is too short to stop the train, it is negligence for him to fail to give the alarm signal.-Id.

114 (Ky.) In an action for damages for damages to plaintiffs' lands by the improper construction 384 (Ky.) It was negligence for deceased to of defendant's roadbed, which caused a creek to go on track ahead of train in attempt to reach cut the lands, evidence held to warrant a find- station ahead of it, where the train was only ing that the damage was only temporary.-Rob- twice as far from station as he was.-Louisville erts v. Sandy Valley & Elkhorn Ry. Co., 179 & N. R. Co. v. Fentress' Adm'r, 179 S. W. 419. S. W. 228.

X. OPERATION.

(D) Injuries to Licensees or Trespassers

in General.

389 (Ky.) Negligence of plaintiff's intestate is proximate cause of his death by being struck by train which he knew to be approaching, although he thought he was on another track than 281 (Ky.) A railroad responsible for the ap-ville & N. R. Co. v. Fentress' Adm'r, 179 S. that on which he was running to station.-Louispointment of a special police officer could not regard him as a de facto officer after his office was vacated by failure to take the oath, etc., since it was bound to know that he was an officer de jure before he was given employment on its trains. Cincinnati, N. O. & T. P. Ry. Co. v. Cundiff, 179 S. W. 615.

W. 419.

390 (Ky.) Though a trespasser on a railroad track was guilty of contributory negligence, recovery for his death may be had where those in charge of a train did not use reasonable care after discovering his position of peril. In view of Ky. St. § 3755, railroad held re--Cincinnati, N. O. & T. P. Ry. Co. v. Jones' sponsible for acts of special railway police of- Adm'r, 179 S. W. 851. ficer whose office had been vacated for failure to take oath, etc.-Id.

390 (Tex.Civ.App.) Where defendant's engine crew was negligent after discovery of one on the track, it was immaterial that such person (F) Accidents at Crossings. was negligent in entering thereon.-Chicago, 312 (Tenn.) Under Shannon's Code, § 1574, R. I. & G. Ry. Co. v. Loftis, 179 S. W. 930. subsecs. 1, 2, engineer held not required to sound 390 (Tex.Civ.App.) Where, after a pedeswhistle or bell on approaching railroad crossing not designated by a lookout sign.-Whittaker v. Louisville & N. R. Co., 179 S. W. 140.

320 (Tenn.) Count in action for injury at railroad crossing, brought under Shannon's Code, 1574, subsec. 4, not alleging that the train struck the plaintiff, being under the com

trian's left leg had been cut off, the engineer, acting on the supposition that he had not been struck, released the emergency brakes, in consequence of which the train moved forward, and caused loss of the right leg, held, that the railroad company was liable, under the doctrine of discovered peril, for loss of the right leg.

For cases in Dec. Dig. & Am. Dig. Key No. Series & Indexes see same topic and KEY-NUMBER

St. Louis Southwestern Ry. Co. of Texas v.
Aston, 179 S. W. 1128.

(I) Fires.

460 (Tex.) Owner of barn destroyed by fire caused by a spark from railroad locomotive held debarred from recovery by his own contributory negligence in leaving open a window facing the road; the interior being littered with straw.St. Louis Southwestern Ry. Co. of Texas v. Arey, 179 S. W. 860.

Facts held sufficient to charge engineer with negligence under the doctrine of discovered peril, where it showed that he knew of plaintiff's perilous position, though it did not show that he knew certainly that he would be injured unless the train was stopped.-Id. 398 (Ky.) In an action against a railroad 479 (Ky.) In an action for setting fire by for a death near the track, evidence held insuf- sparks from defendant's locomotive, alleged to ficient to support verdict for plaintiff.-Cin- be due to the negligent operation of the train, cinnati, N. O. & T. P. Ry. Co. v. Frogg's evidence showing a defective spark arrester was Adm'r, 179 S. W. 1062. not inadmissible because it was not pleaded.Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Feeney, 179 S. W. 826.

398 (Tex.Civ.App.) Evidence held to authorize finding that defendant's engine crew discovered the child on the track, unaware of the approaching train in time to have avoided the death.-Chicago, R. I. & G. Ry. Co. v. Loftis, 179 S. W. 930.

400 (Ky.) Testimony by persons in position to hear it that a railroad whistle was not heard, though of a negative character, presents an issue of fact as to whether an alarm signal was given.-Cincinnati, N. O. & T. P. Ry. Co. v. Jones' Adm'r, 179 S. W. 851.

400 (Tex.Civ.App.) In an action against a railroad for death of plaintiffs' minor son, while walking on the tracks, whether defendant negligently operated its engine at a high rate of speed held for the jury.-Chicago, R. I. & G. Ry. Co. v. Loftis, 179 S. W. 930.

401 (Tenn.) Instruction as to duty of employés operating engine if they could have seen a person on the track before another train cut off their view held confusing.-Cincinnati, N. O. & T. P. Ry. Co. v. Wright, 179 S. W. 641.

(H) Injuries to Animals on or near Tracks.

481 (Tex. Civ.App.) In an action for the destruction of plaintiff's house by fire from defendant's locomotive evidence that said locomotive had set fire on the right of way the day before held properly excluded.-Moose v. Missouri, K. & T. Ry. Co. of Texas, 179 S. W. 75.

484 (Ky.) In an action for the burning of a barn by sparks from defendant's locomotive, evidence that such sparks caused the fire held sufficient to authorize the submission of defendant's negligence to the jury.-Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Feeney, 179 S. W. 826.

484 (Tex. Civ.App.) In an action against a railway company for the destruction of plaintiff's house by fire from the spark of a locomotive, evidence held to justify direction of verdict for defendant.-Moose v. Missouri, K. & T. Ry. Co. of Texas, 179 S. W. 75.

RAPE.

See Criminal Law, 814, 945.

II. PROSECUTION AND PUNISHMENT. (B) Evidence.

411 (Tex.Civ.App.) The fencing law, Ver-40 (Tenn.) In a prosecution for rape, evinon's Sayles' Ann. Civ. St. 1914, art. 6603, has dence of previous acts of intercourse between no application to switchyards and station

S. W. 145.

grounds of a railroad company, where a fence the prosecutrix and other men held admissible would endanger employés.-Ft. Worth & D. C. on the probability of consent.-Lee v. State, 179 Ry. Co. v. Decatur Cotton Seed Oil Co., 17944 (Tenn.) In a prosecution for rape, evidence of prior intercourse between prosecutrix and accused is admissible to raise an implication of consent.-Lee v. State, 179 S. W. 145.

S. W. 1104.

415 (Tex.Civ.App.) Where a municipal ordinance prohibiting the running at large of domestic animals is enforced, a railroad is under no obligation to keep a lookout for trespassing animals in its switchyard.-Ft. Worth & D. C. Ry. Co. v. Decatur Cotton Seed Oil Co., 179

S. W. 1104.

425 (Tex.Civ.App.) The attempt of a horse to recross a trestle, in doing which it fell and was injured, held the proximate cause of the injury, and not any negligence in the construction or maintenance of the trestle or the right of way fences.-Missouri, K. & T. Ry. Co. of Texas v. Lovell, 179 S. W. 1111.

to sustain a finding that the defendant was the 51 (Tex.Cr.App.) Evidence held sufficient person that committed the crime.—Jernigan v. State, 179 S. W. 1187.

See Infants,
166, 171.

RATIFICATION.

57; Principal and Agent, REAL ACTIONS.

See Ejectment; Quieting Title; Trespass to
Try Title.

REASONABLE DOUBT.

442 (Tex. Civ.App.) In an action for the killing of cattle on railroad tracks, evidence as to where they were struck, based on the evidences found on the ground, is admissible.-Ft. See Criminal Law, 561. Worth & D. C. Ry. Co. v. Decatur Cotton Seed Oil Co., 179 S. W. 1104.

Ann. Civ. St. 1914, art. 6603, there is no prima See Carriers, 32.

443 (Tex.Civ.App.) Under Vernon's Sayles'

facie case against a railway for the death of a

horse, which was not struck by its trains, but which fell through a trestle on the defendant

REBATES.

REBUTTAL.

company's right of way.-Missouri, K. & T. Ry. See Criminal Law, 683; Witnesses,

Co. of Texas v. Lovell, 179 S. W. 1111.

447 (Tex. Civ.App.) In an action against a railroad for the killing of cattle, a charge, authorizing verdict for plaintiff, held erroneous under Vernon's Sayles' Ann. Civ. St. 1914, art. 6603, as authorizing verdict against the company though the cattle were killed at places where it was not bound to fence.-Ft. Worth & D. C. Ry. Co. v. Decatur Cotton Seed Oil Co., 179 S. W. 1104.

A charge held erroneous in placing too great a burden on the operatives of the railroad com

376.

RECEIVERS.

See Appeal and Error, 101, 1052; Corporations, 553-566; Pleading, 245.

I. NATURE AND GROUNDS OF RE

CEIVERSHIP.

(A) Nature and Subjects of Remedy.

3 (Tex.Civ.App.) A bill which has for its sole object the appointment of a receiver will not be entertained.-Continental Trust Co. v.

(B) Grounds of Appointment of Receiver. I stitute the lost papers.-Bennett v. State, 179 24 (Mo.App.) On facts alleged in petition S. W. 713. for rescission of contract entered into during minority and for cancellation of notes, chattel mortgage, etc., held that plaintiff had a right to apply for the appointment of a receiver.-Moser v. Renner, 179 S. W. 970.

[blocks in formation]

155 (Tex.) Where the court takes charge of quasi public corporations, operating them through a receiver, it may make the necessary debts of operation a prior lien upon the income or the property itself.-Craver v. Greer, 179 S. W. 862.

In view of Code Cr. Proc. art. 482, lost papers can be substituted without notice served upon the accused, and, in any event, his appearance and answer to a motion to substitute without such service amounted to a waiver of notice. -Id.

REDIRECT EXAMINATION.

See Witnesses, 286.

REFORMATION OF INSTRUMENTS. See Limitation of Actions, 177.

I. RIGHT OF ACTION AND DEFENSES. 18 (Ark.) Equity does not reform contracts or deeds for a pure mistake of law.-Louis Werner Sawmill Co. v. Sessoms, 179 S. W. 185.

19 (Ark.) To justify a decree for reformation of a deed on the ground of mistake, the mistake must have been mutual.-Louis Werner Sawmill Co. v. Sessoms, 179 S. W. 185.

19 (Tex.Civ.App.) It was not error to refuse to correct a deed of trust running to defendants as to a misdescription, where it did not appear that a mutual mistake as to such description Gist, 179 S. W. 1090. had been made.-Memphis Cotton Oil Co. v.

II. PROCEEDINGS AND RELIEF.

32 (Ark.) Lumber company's suit to reform deeds to timber on ground of mistake as to time for removal, not brought within six years, held barred by laches.-Louis Werner Sawmill Co. v. Sessoms, 179 S. W. 185.

Without some element of estoppel, vested liens 33 (Tex.Civ.App.) If reformation of transon property of a private corporation or individu- fer of interest in business to include claim sued al cannot be postponed to the receiver's operat-on was desired, held that the transferor should ing expenses, and that one is a party to the re- have been made a party.-City of Brownsville ceivership suit is insufficient to produce that re-v. Tumlinson, 179 S. W. 1107. sult.-Id.

Plaintiff, in a suit to foreclose a mortgage, in 36 (Tex. Civ.App.) If reformation of transwhich a receiver was appointed to continue the fer of interest in business to include claim sued business on application of intervening creditors, on was desired, held that proper allegations held entitled to priority for his mortgage over should have been made.-City of Brownsville the receiver's operating expenses.-Id. v. Tumlinson, 179 S. W. 1107.

Presence of mortgage creditors at a creditors' meeting at which a receivership to continue the business was decided on, held not to estop them to assert the priority of their liens over the receiver's operating expenses.-Id.

Bank which was instrumental in procuring the appointment of a receiver to continue the business of a lumber concern held not entitled to object to the postponement of its mortgage to the receiver's operating expenses.-Id.

VI. ACTIONS.

45 (Ark.) Reformation of bond given to secure return of mortgaged property with respect to the time for its return held properly denied; the evidence not being sufficiently clear, unequivocal, and decisive.-Eureka Stone Co. v. Roach, 179 S. W. 499.

To justify or authorize the reformation of a written instrument for fraud or mistake, the evidence of such fraud or mistake must be clear, unequivocal, and decisive.-Id.

REFRESHING MEMORY.

168 (Ky.) A receiver cannot be sued indi- See Witnesses, 255. vidually upon a contract made by him as a receiver.-Avey v. Burnley, 179 S. W. 1050.

RECEIVING STOLEN GOODS.

See Criminal Law, 507.

[blocks in formation]

17 (Tex.Cr.App.) Where copies of the in

REHEARING.

See Appeal and Error, 833, 835; Criminal
Law, 1133.

REJOINDER.

[blocks in formation]

dictment, etc., certified on a change of venue See Execution, 33; Life Estates; Wills,

from F. county to M. county were lost, the

mm 634.

jurisdiction of the M. county district court at-16 (Ky.) Gen. St. Ky. c. 63, art. 6, § 1, autached, and it might take proceedings to sub-thorizes the sale and reinvestment of estates of

persons taking vested remainders after a life estate created by a will.-Johnson v. Whitcomb, 179 S. W. 821.

Children of remaindermen held barred from attacking sale under Gen. St. c. 63, art. 6, although not made parties thereto.-Id.

could not be determined.-Couch v. Starks, 179 S. W. 995.

72 (Ark.) Evidence in replevin for mules held to sustain a verdict for defendant.-Couch v. Starks, 179 S. W. 995.

REPLY.

A sale of property on petition of life tenant under Gen. St. c. 63, art. 6, is binding against contingent heirs who might take the property See Pleading, 180. should all remaindermen die before the life tenant.-Id.

REPORTS.

Where sale is made under Gen. St. c. 63, art. 6, the sale and reinvestment cut off all rights of See Evidence, 366. contingent takers, who must then look to the fund derived from the sale for their share.

REMISSION.

See Appeal and Error, 1140.

REMOVAL.

See Fixtures, 33.

REMOVAL OF CAUSES.

Id.

III. CITIZENSHIP OR ALIENAGE OF

PARTIES.

RESCISSION.

See Cancellation of Instruments; Sales, 124.

RESERVATIONS.

See Deeds, 143.

RES GESTÆ.

See Criminal Law, 368; Divorce, 62;
Evidence, 128.

[blocks in formation]

RESIDENCE.

RES IPSA LOQUITUR.

See Master and Servant, 265; Telegraphs and Telephones, 20.

RES JUDICATA.

See Judgment, 540-597, 822.

RESTITUTION.

39 (Ky.) Where verdict was erroneously directed for the resident defendant, the case will be treated thereafter as though the ruling were See Ejectment, 122. not made, and the nonresident defendant cannot remove to the federal court for diversity of citizenship.-Carter Coal Co. v. Prichard's Adm'r, 179 S. W. 1038.

RESTRAINT OF TRADE.

See Contracts, 116; Monopolies.

RESULTING TRUSTS.

Where verdict was properly directed for the resident defendant, he is still in the case until the appeal taken is decided, so that until then the case cannot be removed to the federal court See Trusts, 63, 89. for diversity of citizenship between the remaining defendant and the plaintiff.-Id.

47 (Ky.) Petition, in an action for servant's

RETROSPECTIVE LAWS.

wrongful death, held to state a good cause of See Taxation, 861.

action against both defendants so that neither
was entitled to a transfer to the federal court
for diversity of citizenship to avoid which the
plaintiff made the alleged fraudulent joinder of See Taxation.
parties.-Garter Coal Co. v. Prichard's Adm'r,
179 S. W. 1038.

VI. PROCEEDINGS TO PROCURE AND
EFFECT OF REMOVAL.

REVENUE.

REVIEW.

See Appeal and Error; Criminal Law, 1134-1172; Justices of the Peace, 141. REVISION.

86 (Ky.) Where the defendant moves to remove to the federal court for diversity of See Statutes, 231. citizenship, alleging fraud in the joinder of parties, he must set out the facts showing the fraud.-Carter Coal Co. v. Prichard's Adm'r, 179 S. W. 1038.

[blocks in formation]
« ÀÌÀü°è¼Ó »