페이지 이미지
PDF
ePub

BUILDING ORDINANCE-See MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS (7, 8,

12).
BUILDING RESTRICTIONS-See DEEDS (2, 3); MUNICIPAL COR-

PORATIONS (8, 12).
BULK SALES ACT–See EQUITY (4); FRAUDULENT CONVEYANCES

(1-5).
BURDEN OF PROOF-See BILLS AND NOTES (4); CRIMINAL LAW

(6); MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS (9); STREET RAILWAYS (3).

CANCELLATION OF INSTRUMENTS.

Conflicting evidence considered, and held, to be insufficient

to support a decree setting aside a deed of decedent on

the ground of mental incapacity. Griffith v. Fuller, 553.
CAPIAS–See ARREST (1); DEFAULT (1).
CARRIERS-See MASTER AND SERVANT (2, 4, 15, 16).
CASE-See TRIAL (4).
CATTLE GUARDS–See RAILROADS (1, 2).
CAUSE OF DEATH-See MASTER AND SERVANT (3).
CAUSE OF DISABILITY-See INSURANCE (6).
CHARACTER WITNESS-See CRIMINAL LAW (2); EVIDENCE

(1).
CHARITIES–See SOLDIERS' HOME (1).
CHARTERS-See MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS (1).
CHOSES IN ACTION-See GIFTS (2).
CITIES–See MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS (1, 4-12); WATERS AND

WATERCOURSES (1).
CIVIL SERVICE-See MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS (4-6).
CLAIMANTS-See ESTATES OF DECEDENTS (4).
COAL MINE-See CONTRACTS (5).
COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES.

1. Neither the legislature nor any officer or board of the

State may interfere with the affairs and property of the
university or the Michigan Agricultural College, although
in making appropriations for its support the legislature
may attach any conditions that it deems expedient, and
the appropriation cannot be received without complying
with the expressed conditions. Agler v. Michigan Agricul-

tural College, 559.
2. Not having elected to be brought within the provisions of

the workmen's compensation law, Act No. 10, Extra Ses-
sion 1912 (2 How. Stat. [2d Ed.] $ 3939 et seq.), the

[ocr errors]

COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES—Continued.

Michigan Agricultural College is not subject to its terms.

Id.
3. A servant of the college or of the State board of agricul-

ture is not a servant of the State, within the meaning of
the statute. Id.

COLLUSION-See DIVORCE (4).
COLORED PERSONS–See TRIAL (2).
COMMISSIONS–See EVIDENCE (19).
COMMON COUNTS-See PLEADING (3, 5, 6).
COMPENSATION FOR INJURIES–See MASTER AND SERVANT

(1).
COMPETENCY-See CANCELLATION OF INSTRUMENTS; CONTRACTS

(7); HUSBAND AND WIFE; WITNESSES (4).
COMPROMISE AND SETTLEMENT See CONTRACTS (9);

ESTATES OF DECEDENTS (8).

CONCLUSIONS-See INSURANCE (5); BILLS AND NOTES (12).
CONDITIONS SUBSEQUENT-See DEEDS (1).
CONDUCT OF COURT-See APPEAL AND ERROR (1); TRIAL (2).
CONFESSIONS–See CRIMINAL LAW (11, 12).
CONSEQUENTIAL INJURIES-See DAMAGES (5); PLEADING (4).
CONSOLIDATION OF CAUSES–See APPEAL AND ERROR (7).
CONSOLIDATION OF CORPORATIONS-See CORPORATIONS (1,

2).

CONSPIRACY-See ACTION,

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW.

1. Under article 5, 83, of the Constitution, giving to each

county and such territory as may be attached thereto a
separate representative "when it has attained a popula-
tion equal to a moiety of the ratio of representation,"
when a county has attained 14,051 inhabitants, or one-half
of the legislative ratio, it is entitled to a separate repre-
sentative in the State legislature. Stevens v. Secretary of

State, 199.
2. If a county is not alone entitled to a representative, it

must be joined to an entire county or counties to have
a representative: also, if the county alone is entitled to
a representative it cannot be combined with others to
form a district; the only exception being that a county
having less than a moiety, surrounded by counties that
have more than such moiety, may be combined with one
of those which have a moiety or upwards. Id.

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW-Continued.

3. The apportionment act of 1913 (Act No. 336) contains pro-

visions in violation of the Constitution and is invalid in
that it combines counties which are entitled to a separate
representative with smaller counties to form a representa-
tive district, although they were not within the said ex-

ception. Id.
4. Act No. 232, Pub. Acts 1903, as amended (4 How. Stat.

[2d Ed.] 88 9532, 9543), charging the directors of a cor-
poration with liability for the debts thereof in case of
failure to file its annual report in the office of the sec-
retary of State, is sufficiently entitled as “an act to revise
and consolidate the laws providing for the incorporation
of manufacturing and mercantile companies or any union
of the two, and for the incorporation of companies for
carrying on any other lawful business, except such as are
precluded from organization under this act by its express
provisions, and to prescribe the powers and fix the duties
and liabilities of such corporations.” Reuter Hub & Spoke

Co. v. Hicks, 250.
5. The title is sufficient, although it does not indicate that a

penalty is prescribed as to the individual directors. Id.
6. No penalty being exacted until the parties have had their

day in court, the statute does not violate the constitutional

requirement of due process of law. Id.
7. Act No. 170, Pub. Acts 1911, amending the provisions of

the liquor law, 2 Comp. Laws, $ 5386, so as to authorize
a township board or other municipality to reject all liquor
bonds, is unconstitutional, because the title of the amended
statute is not broad enough to include prohibition of the

liquor traffic. McCabe v. Township Board of Burnside, 683.
8. The amendment of the liquor law of 1909, Act No. 291,

employing the word "licensing" in the title of the amend-
ment, so as to read "An act to provide for the taxation,
licensing and regulation of the sale of liquor," did not alter
the purpose of the original act (Act No. 313, Pub. Acts
1883), so as to permit an amendment which would effect

prohibition. Id.
See COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES (1); MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS

(5).

CONSTRUCTION OF CONTRACTS–See CONTRACTS (8-10).

CONSTRUCTION OF ORDINANCE-See MUNICIPAL CORPORA-

TIONS (10).
CONSTRUCTION OF STATUTE-See MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS

(4); STATUTES.
CONSTRUCTION OF WILL-See WILLS (1-3).
CONTINGENT INTERESTS—See ESTATES (1).

CONTRACTS.

1. A married woman is not disabled from making a contract

for domestic services and labor to be performed in the
household of herself and husband and to be paid for out
of her estate after death, notwithstanding she had no
separate property at the date when she made the agree

ment. In re De Spelder's Estate, 153.
2. Changes made in the plans of a building so as to contain

more stores than the original plan and contract called
for, at the instance and request of the owner, were cor-
rectly treated as extras, for which the architect could re-

cover additional compensation. Johnson v. O'Neill, 326.
3. The right of the plaintiff to recover for changes which were

made in the original plans and which were agreed upon
after the bids were received upon the plans, was the same
whether or not the contract had been entered into with

the contractor. Id. 327.
4. Evidence in an action for breach of contract of employ.

ment considered, and held, not to establish a hiring for a
year at an annual salary. Donnelly v. Michigan Malleable

Iron Co., 333.
5. Where the defendant purchased plaintiff's output of coal

for a price stated, and it was stipulated as a part of the
contract that “the prices named in this contract are based
on the present Michigan mining rates of $1.01 per ton,
and shall be increased or reduced on all sizes of coal as
said mining rate may advance or decline," and the rate
of doing the actual mining increased five cents a ton, the
price of such output advanced five cents per ton under the
agreement, and plaintiff was not entitled to demand an
increase of upwards of five per cent. because other mine
work advanced in cost to about that extent. Caledonia

Coal Co. v. Consolidated Coal Co., 431.
6. It is an elementary rule of construction of contracts that

all language used should be recognized and given a mean-

ing where it is possible. Id. 432.
7. Agreements to sell or convey the prospective interests of

heirs in their living ancestor's estate are not regarded
with favor and are rarely, if ever, sustained, without the
consent of the ancestor, who is generally held to be en-
titled to know the situation of his heirs with reference
to each other, to himself and his property. His insanity
or incompetency is not a ground for making an exception

to the general rule. Stevens v. Stevens, 439.
8. It was a question for the court, not for the jury, whether

the effect of a written contract for the purchase of agri-
cultural implements to be resold, that contained the
words “this contract to replace one made earlier in sea-
son," was to supersede the previous agreement. Dowagiac

Manfg. Co. v. Schneider, 538.
9. And evidence showing that the plaintiff in written cor-

CONTRACTS—Continued.

respondence treated the second contract as controlling the
liability of the defendant, justified the trial court in de-
termining, as a matter of law, that the first agreement

was superseded. Id.
10. Defendant's claim that he had not accepted the machines

shipped to him under a contract of purchase was correctly
submitted to the jury, plaintiff having requested the court

to charge the jury relative to the contention. Id.
See DAMAGES (6); ESTATES OF DECEDENTS (1); EVIDENCE (2,

6-11, 13, 14); FRAUDS, STATUTE OF (1, 2); LANDLORD AND
TENANT (3); MECHANICS' LIENS (2, 3); NEGLIGENCE (5);
PLEADING (5, 6); SALES (2); USURY (1); VENDOR AND PUR-
CHASER (2, 4, 5, 8, 9).

CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE-See MASTER AND SERVANT

(14); RAILROADS (1); STREET RAILWAYS (4, 7).

CONVERSION OF TIMBER-See LOGS AND LOGGING (1).

CONVEYANCES-See CORPORATIONS (2); USURY (2).

COPY-See EVIDENCE (13).

CORPORATIONS.

1. Where the officers and stockholders of a reorganized cor.

poration knew that one-fifth of the shares of the original
company were not present at the meeting at which the
reorganization was authorized, and that the executors of
an estate that owned a large part of such stock were
not present and their proxies were invalid, the reor.
ganized corporation was chargeable with notice of the
facts known to the majority of its stockholders and to its

officers. Marsh v. Breen Iron Co., 204.
2. Where one-fifth and upwards of the shares of stock in a

mining company were not present or represented at a
meeting of the stockholders at which a reorganization was
effected, and the newly formed corporation took over the
assets and property of the predecessor without any consid-
eration paid to such interests as were not represented, so
far as the dissenting shareholders were concerned their

rights were not affected by the transfer. Id. 205.
3. And where it appeared that the persons who were entitled

to share in the estate were in part infants and did not
know about the acts of the executors, and that decedent's
widow, who had an interest in the stock, did not learn
of the existence of the stock until eight or nine years
after the will was admitted to probate, and subsequent
to the death of one of the executors, that she attempted
to cite the surviving executor into court to disclose what
had been done with the estate, that she settled with the
executor for certain rentals that had been collected by
him and he procured an order of the probate court dis-
charging him as executor of the estate, as having settled

« 이전계속 »