§ 1.

COUNTIES.

Government and officers. Under Act 1891, relating to liquor licenses, which directs that in the cities the sum of $100 shall be paid to the counties, and the balance ($900) shall be paid to the city treasurer, the portion of the license fee due the city, though paid into the county treasury in the first instance, is not the state's money, or money paid to the use of the commonwealth, within Act April 15, 1834, § 42, which gives the county treasurer a percentage on all moneys collected by him and paid into the state treasury, or otherwise for the use of the commonwealth.-City of Pittsburg v. Anderson (Pa.) 1092.

Under Const. 1874, art. 14, § 5, which declares that, in counties containing over 150,000 inhabitants, all county officers shall be paid by salary, a county treasurer in such a county, whose salary is $6,000 per annum, is not entitled to retain any fee for the performance of any municipal duty imposed upon him by law; and consequently such a city treasurer is not within Act April 15, 1834, § 42.-City of Pittsburg v. Anderson (Pa.) 1092.

§ 2. Claims against county.

Power of supreme court to review judgment of commissioners on claim for support of county paupers held not taken away by Laws 1865, c. 4077, 8 1.-Town of Plymouth v. Grafton County (N. H.) 523.

Rejection by county commissioners of claim properly presented held to authorize its presentation to court, under Pub. St. c. 27, § 13.-Town of Plymouth v. Grafton County (N. H.) 523. § 3. Actions.

Assumpsit, on claim of town against county which had been rejected by county, will be treated as a proceeding to submit claim as to which disagreement has arisen; costs to be allowed only as authorized in such cases.-Town of Plymouth v. Grafton County (N. H.) 523.

COURTS.

Justices' courts, see "Justices of the Peace."
Review of decisions, see "Appeal and Error."
Right to trial by jury, see "Jury," § 1.
Trial by court without jury, see "Trial," § 8.

§ 1. Jurisdiction in general.

The question of enforcement of a liability created only by statute of a foreign state is not one of comity, but is one of judicial power.-Crippen v. Laighton (N. H.) 538.

There is no obligation of comity requiring New Hampshire to enforce an action authorized New Hampshire to enforce an action authorized by Kansas statutes against a stockholder for debts of a Kansas bank.-Crippen v. Laighton (N. H.) 538.

Under Acts May 5, 1876, and March 23, 1877, common pleas has jurisdiction to foreclose mortgage executed by street-railway company.-Old Colony Trust Co. v. Allentown & B. Rapid Transit Co. (Pa.) 319.

§ 4. Courts of limited or inferior jurisdiction.

Trial judge failing to certify, as required by statute, that the premises in controversy in ejectment are of greater value than $1,500, case appealed to supreme court will be remitted to superior court.-Matthews v. Rising (Pa.) 1067.

V. S. § 1452, held not to extend jurisdiction of equitable action of account between three or more partners to city court, with jurisdiction of civil matters where debt or demand does not exceed $500.-Stevens v. Coburn (Vt.) 354.

5. Courts of appellate jurisdiction. The circuit court is required to settle all disputed facts before sending up a case for an advisory opinion.-Wilson v. Pennsylvania, P. & B. R. Co. (N. J. Sup.) 850.

§ 6. Concurrent and conflicting jurisdiction, and comity. Courts of Delaware cannot permit, on grounds of comity, Maryland corporation, which has been deprived of control of its assets by appointment of receivers, to sue therein.-E. F. Kirwan Mfg. Co. v. Truxton (Del. Super.) 427.

A maritime lien given by a state statute_cannot be enforced before a state tribunal.-Hankins v. Cox & Sons Co. (N. J. Sup.) 206.

COVENANTS.

§ 1. Actions for breach.

In an action for breach of covenant of seisin, in which the owner of an alleged outstanding title was not a party, the court will not determine er plaintiff was entitled to nominal or substantial the question of title in order to determine whethdamages.-Murphy v. Hill (N. H.) 703.

The covenant to assume a mortgage being broken, and judgment of foreclosure secured against plaintiff, he could sue defendant on the covenant without proof of payment by himself.-McAbee v. Cribbs (Pa.) 1066.

COVERTURE.

538.

§ 2.

and

CREDIBILITY.

Of witness, see "Witnesses," § 3.

sent a subsequently acquired judgment by petition.-National State Bank v. McCormick (N. J. Ch.) 706.

Creditors' bill will not lie for property fraudulently conveyed to another, there being adequate remedy at law by levy and sale in cases of real estate, and attachment in case of personal property.-People's Nat. Bank v. Kern (Pa. Sup.) 331.

CRIMINAL LAW.

§ 7. Appeal and error, and certiorari. Where the evidence was sufficient to support the verdict, and the charge was clear, impartial, comprehensive, and free from error, a verdict of murder in the first degree will not be disturbed. -Commonwealth v. Morrison (Pa.) 913.

A clerical error in recording the sentence, on a verdict of murder, held insufficient to support a specification of error.-Commonwealth v. Morrison (Pa.) 913.

CROSS BILL.

CROSS-EXAMINATION.

See "Witnesses," § 2.

CUSTODY.

fer (Md.) 1043.

To establish the defense of insanity, the burden is on defendant to prove the fact by a preponderance of evidence.-State v. Parks (Me.) 899.

Testimony of experiments as to identification held competent.-Richardson v. State (Md.) 999. Nonexperts held competent to testify whether, during their acquaintance with accused, they had noticed any indications of insanity.-Commonwealth v. Cressinger (Pa.) 433.

A physician may testify as a nonexpert as to insanity of accused.-Commonwealth v. Cressinger (Pa.) 433.

Confession obtained by a trick held admissible, there being nothing to show false confession made through fear or hope.-Commonwealth v. Cressinger (Pa.) 433.

A nonexpert witness on a defense of insanity can testify from his observation of the prisoner whether he believed him to be insane.-Commonwealth v. Brown (Pa.) 497.

On a trial for murder the court need not hear the prisoner's testimony as to whether a confession offered by the prosecution was voluntarily made, to determine whether it was voluntary, before receiving evidence of it.-Commonwealth v. Epps (Pa.) 570.

Witnesses other than officers may testify to the confession of a crime made by a prisoner to them. Commonwealth v. Epps (Pa.) 570.

CUSTOMS AND USAGES.

Where facts proved to establish a usage are undisputed, their effect is a question of law for the court.-Runyan v. Central R. Co. (N. J. Sup.) 985.

law for the court.-Runyan v. Central R. Co. What is a sufficient usage is a question of (N. J. Sup.) 985.

DAMAGES.

Compensation for property taken for public use, see "Eminent Domain." § 2.

For particular injuries, see "Death," § 1; "NuiBreach by seller of contract for sale of goods, sance," § 1. see "Sales," § 5.

Injuries caused by public improvements, see "Municipal Corporations," § 6.

§ 1. Grounds and subjects of compensatory damages.

Evidence, in action for personal injuries, held competent to be considered in estimating the damages, if the jury determine that the injury testified to resulted from the accident alleged.Baltimore City Pass. Ry. Co. v. Baer (Md.) 992. In an action for personal injuries, sick benefits received by plaintiff from any source other than defendant are not to be considered by the jury.Baltimore City Pass. Ry. Co. v. Baer (Md.) 992.

Instruction authorizing allowance for pain by way of compensation held not error.-Bamford v. Pittsburgh & B. Traction Co. (Pa.) 1068.

Pain and suffering are a distinct item, for which damages may be awarded.-Schenkel v. Pittsburgh & B. Traction Co. (Pa.) 1072. § 2. Measure of damages.

In action for breach of contract not to sell to anyone else in same city, plaintiff is not entitled to loss of profits on other goods, not included in contract, purchased from defendant before he was aware of breach in selling to others.Saddlery Hardware Co. v. Hillsborough Mills (N. H.) 300.

The measure of damages for the failure to deliver personalty sold is the difference between the contract price and the market price at the time of breach.-Kinports v. Breon (Pa.) 436. § 3. Pleading, evidence, and assessment. Exhibition of amputated toes in action for personal injuries held not erroneous.-Nebonne v. Concord R. R. (N. H.) 521.

It may be shown that plaintiff's injury resulting in loss of toes on one foot was enhanced because the leg was naturally shorter than the other.-Nebonne v. Concord R. R. (N. H.) 521.

Annuity tables are not admissible as a means of estimating damages for personal injuries.Kerrigan v. Pennsylvania R. Co. (Pa.) 1069.

An instruction to the jury, in a personal injury case, that the life of plaintiff, who was 22 years old, was "estimated by the Carlyle and other life tables at 40 to 45 years, and that they could take that as a means of estimation of what would compensate him for his loss," is error.Kerrigan v. Pennsylvania R. Co. (Pa.) 1069.

DEAD BODIES.

Facts held to preclude husband from interfering with removal of his wife's remains from one plot in a cemetery to another prepared for them by her parents.-Toppin v. Moriarty (N. J. Ch.) 469.

DEATH.

§ 1. Actions for causing death. Questions as to habits of deceased for industry and saving qualities held admissible in an action for wife's death.-Wilcox v. Wilmington City Ry. Co. (Del. Super.) 686.

In an action by husband for wife's death, a question as to deceased's earning capacity held improper, as calling for conclusion.-Wilcox v. Wilmington City Ry. Co. (Del. Super.) 686.

In an action by husband, as administrator, for wife's death, evidence that she supported a daughter some time before held inadmissible.Wilcox v. Wilmington City Ry. Co. (Del. Super.) 686.

In action for death, deceased's state of health at time of injury may be shown.-Wilcox v. Wilmington City Ry. Co. (Del. Super.) 686.

In action for a wife's death, plaintiff cannot show she was industrious in work about her home.-Wilcox v. Wilmington City Ry. Co. (Del. Super.) 686.

In action for wife's death, held, plaintiff could show whether or not she received money per week independent of her husband.-Wilcox v. Wilmington City Ry. Co. (Del. Super.) 686.

Husband suing for wife's death cannot show that she received money from him weekly, which was hers after household expenses were paid, and therefore death was a pecuniary loss.-Wilcox v. Wilmington City Ry. Co. (Del. Super.)

686.

In an action by husband, as administrator, for wife's death, funeral expenses are not recoverable.-Wilcox v. Wilmington City Ry. Co. (Del. Super.) 686.

On death of beneficiary pending suit, injury would be limited to his lifetime.-Cooper v. Shore Electric Co. (N. J. Err. & App.) 633.

Under Act March 3, 1848, action to recover damages for death occasioned by negligence, brought by personal representative of deceased, does not abate on death of beneficiary for whose benefit it is brought.-Cooper v. Shore Electric Co. (N. J. Err. & App.) 633.

Under Act March 3, 1848, giving a right of action for wrongful death, the damages must be limited to compensation for the deprivation of a reasonable expectation of pecuniary advantage from the continuance of the life of deceased. Graham v. Consolidated Traction Co. (N. J. Sup.) 964.

The fact that three verdicts in the same amount have been returned will not prevent the court from setting the last one aside, as excessive, if the amount is so large as to produce injustice, whether from iguorance, malice, or

ances.'

Of trust, see "Mortgages." Parol or extrinsic evidence, see "Evidence," § 9. 1. Requisites and validity.

Under Gen. Laws, c. 135, §§ 3, 4, the record of a deed, the execution of which is attested by only one witness, is not constructive notice of its existence.-Salvage v. Haydock (N. H.) 696.

man, on an agreement to support, will not be A deed obtained by a care taker of an old wosustained, where obtained by false representations, made with knowledge or contrivance of the grantee.-Hammell v. Hyatt (N. J. Ch.) 953.

Evidence held to show grantor in deed mentally incompetent to convey property.-Hammell v. Hyatt (N. J. Ch.) 953.

§ 2. Construction and operation.

Clause in deed of right of way to railroad company, giving the grantor crossing over the tracks when built, is reservation, and not exception.Knowlton v. New York, N. H. & H. R. Co. (Conn.) 8.

Reservation in deed construed, and held sufficiently definite as to location.-Smith v. Furbish (N. H.) 398.

Reservation in a deed of an acre to the grantor to be selected held not forfeited by delay in selection.-Smith v. Furbish (N. H.) 398.

Deed construed, and right of flowage reserved therein held appurtenant to land on which the right to build a dam was reserved.-Smith v. Furbish (N. H.) 398.

Reservation in deed construed, and locality thereof determined.-Smith v. Furbish (N. H.) 398.

Deed construed, and held to contain an exception of the right of building a dam with right of flowage, and not a reservation.-Smith v. Furbish (N. H.) 398.

Under deed reserving an acre to the grantor, the grantee to have the timber thereon, held, that grantee did not forfeit his right to the timber by unreasonable delay in removing the same.-Smith v. Furbish (N. H.) 398.

When a deed is made excepting an acre to be selected, the selection may be made by grantor's heirs.-Smith v. Furbish (N. H.) 398.

Condition in deed that grantee should forever maintain a fence held binding on subsequent owners of property through mesne conveyances containing no reference to condition.-Patten v. Patten (N. H.) 696.

Restriction as to building more than one house on lots conveyed held to permit but one house on the entire tract.-Gamm v. Renner (N. J. Ch.)

632.

Words in habendum making land subject to maintenance of grantors held to create continuing lien.-Bonebrake v. Summers (Pa.) 330. Conveyance of fee by reference to description in prior conveyances held not limited by, provision granting easement in part of property.Chapman v. Longworth (Vt.) 352.

Deed given by one having title is effectual to pass his interest, though he has no record title.Sowles v. Butler (Vt.) 355.

§ 3. Pleading and evidence.

Evidence introduced for purpose of annulling deed on ground of no consideration held not sufficient.-Monticelli v. Friedman (Pa.) 562.

DE FACTO OFFICERS.

See "Officers," § 1.

DEFAMATION.

See "Libel and Slander."

DEFAULT.

Judgment by, see "Judgment," § 1.

DELIVERY.

Of goods by carrier, see "Carriers," § 1.

DEMAND

For payment of bill or note, see "Bills and Notes," § 3.

DEMURRER.

In pleading, see "Equity," § 4.

DENIALS.

In pleading, see "Pleading," § 1.

DEPOSITIONS.

The fact that a deposition has been used before a referee is no ground for its exclusion on a trial before the court, where the issues were not finally determined by the referee.-McGrath v. Hervey (N. J. Err. & App.) 962.

DEPOSITS.

In bank, see "Banks and Banking," § 2.

DESCENT AND DISTRIBUTION.

Property and interests undisposed of by will, see "Wills," 18.

§ 1. Persons entitled and their respective shares.

Heir to whom will gives "$1 and no more" may inherit property not devised.-Wells v. Anderson (N. H.) 103.

Under Gen. Laws, c. 203, § 22, held, that testator's intention in omitting to provide for children or issue of deceased child may be proved by parol.-In re O'Connor (R. I.) 591. § 2. Rights and liabilities of heirs and distributees.

A writing executed by a child to her grandfather for a sum paid by him to her, relinquishing all her "rights of dower and interests in his estate," held sufficient to show that it was paid as an advancement.-Cass v. Brown (N. H.) 86.

Under Act Feb. 24, 1834, § 34, the realty of a decedent in possession of his heirs cannot be charged with unsecured debts of their intestate, where they are not proceeded against for over 10 years after his death.-Commonwealth v. Cooper (Pa.) 43.

Where an estate held in common by devisees is liable to a charge, under a bond of the testator for the payment of a certain monthly allowance, the obligee cannot be compelled to accept any other settlement in lieu of the bond.-Aylesworth v. Crocker (R. I.) 308.

§ 1.

Under statutory provisions. Order directing discovery by defendant, and restraining him from collecting moneys, is severable, and will not be vacated because restraining clause is unwarranted.-Githens v. Mount (N. J. Sup.) 851.

Bill being filed for discovery, and framed in words of Act June 16, 1836, providing therefor, objection to entertaining it as a creditors' bill is not too late, though made after report of master, intention to treat it as creditors' bill not being disclosed till after answer and taking of testimony.-People's Nat. Bank v. Kern (Pa.) 331.

Bill for discovery in aid of judgment, not being accompanied by scire facias, as provided by Act June 16, 1836, gives no lien as against the attachment of others.-People's Nat. Bank v. Kern (Pa.) 331.

Bill for discovery for purpose of obtaining evidence, and in aid of legal right, does not draw whole case into equity, but jurisdiction ends with discovery.-People's Nat. Bank v. Kern (Pa.) 331.

DISCRETION OF COURT.

DOCUMENTS.

DOMICILE.

Settlement of pauper, see "Paupers," § 1.

DOWER.

§ 1. Inchoate interest.

Gen. St. § 618, read in the light of sections 630 and 2803, does not give dower to woman divorced by fault of her husband, and married again, when he also married again, and was living with his second wife at his death.-Appeal of Brown (Conn.) 22; Appeal of Macdonald, Id.

Where a wife lives in adultery, in a state of separation from her husband, not occasioned by his fault, and is not afterwards suffered to dwell with him, she forfeits her dower, under Rev.

Code, c. 87, § 9.-McGrenra v. McGrenra (Del. Orph.) 816.

DRAINS.

In cities, see "Municipal Corporations," § 9.

DUE PROCESS OF LAW.

§ 1.

DIVORCE.

Jurisdiction, proceedings, and relief. Testimony, in an action for divorce for cruelty, held insufficient to support a decree.-Goodhues v. Goodhues (Md.) 990.

A finding in a divorce suit that evidence is

insufficient to establish adultery committed before October 28th does not render the same evidence incompetent in a subsequent trial, as bearing on the issue of adultery after that date.-Burns v. Burns (N. H.) 76.

The court has jurisdiction of divorce for conviction of crime committed within the state, when libelee was domiciled therein, though before libelant's domicile in the state, both being so domiciled when the libel was filed.-Harrington v. Harrington (N. H.) 522.

In an action for divorce on the ground of defendant's adultery, testimony as to defendant's general reputation for virtue and chastity is admissible.-Warner v. Warner (N. H.) 908.

Where a husband exercises his marital rights after applying for a divorce on the grounds of adultery, the decree will be set aside on bill of review filed by the wife in a reasonable time, though the husband has in the meantime contracted another marriage.-Clayton v. Clayton (N. J. Ch.) 840.

Under facts set forth, held, a divorced wife exercised reasonable diligence in filing a bill of review to set aside the decree of divorce, though the husband had in the meantime contracted another marriage.-Clayton v. Clayton (N. J. Ch.) 840.

On the evidence, held that the jury was justified in finding husband guilty of cruel and inhuman treatment.-Braun v. Braun (Pa.) 1096.

The statutory prohibition against remarriage of the guilty party with the paramour, where a divorce is granted on the ground of adultery, is no reason why cruelty and adultery may not be set up in the same libel as grounds for divorce. -Braun v. Braun (Pa.) 1096.

It is permissible to set up two grounds of divorce in a libel, especially where the decree is the same for both grounds; i. e. either a mensa or a vinculo.-Braun v. Braun (Pa.) 1096.

EASEMENTS.

1. Creation, existence, and transfer. Reservation of a right of way over a railroad track held extinguished by the separate ownership of the tracts on either side.-Knowlton v.

New York, N. H. & H. R. Co. (Conn.) 8.

Evidence held to warrant a conclusion that land was inaccessible, except by one right of way.-Knowlton v. New York, N. H. & H. R. Co. (Conn.) 8.

One who has an easement in land does not abandon same by merely acquiescing in its use and control by others for a shorter period than 20 years.-Johnson v. Stitt (R. I.) 513.

EJECTMENT.

§ 1. Right of action and defenses. Where grantee accepts his deed and pays purchase money, caveat emptor will apply when in ejectment he sets up deficiency in quantity as warranting him in holding more land than was conveyed to him.-Pringle v. Rogers (Pa.) 275.

In ejectment, contract to convey and deed, construed in light of subsequent conduct of the parties, held to show that defendant was in possession pursuant to license, and not entitled to possession after expiration thereof.-Kopper v. Fulton (Vt.) 92.

Action of ejectment by vendor against purchaser, under executory contract, held not to be defeated by showing that, when tried, trespasser had acquired possession. - Walker v. Arnold (Vt.) 351.

§ 2. Trial, judgment, enforcement of judgment, and review.

In ejectment, a finding that defendant held premises in dispute adversely held not erroneous inerely because plaintiff had been in adverse possession of part thereof covered by eaves of his building.-Sowles v. Butler (Vt.) 355.

3. Damages, mesne profits, improvements, and taxes.

Purchaser under executory contract, defeated in ejectment by vendor for failure to pay, has no rights under statute relating to betterments.Walker v. Arnold (Vt.) 351.