PHYSICIANS AND SURGEONS. See Evidence, 547, 554. PIERS. See Collision, 96. PLEADING. 35 (U.S.C.C.A.) To constitute the offense denounced by Criminal Code, § 215, declaring that whoever shall use the mails in connection with any scheme to defraud shall be guilty of an offense, it is not essential that the scheme meet with success, or result in gain to the per306-petrator or loss to another.-Linn v. United Ship- States, 309. For pleadings in particular actions or proceed- 48(4) (U.S.C.C.A.) Indictment charging that accused under the name of Dr. Jordan, L. J. Jordan, Incorporated, and Jordan's Museum of Anatomy, devised a scheme to defraud, is not objectionable as charging that scheme was conceived by corporation, but charges accused devised scheme.-Oesting v. United States, 206. Indictment for using mails in connection with scheme to defraud by selling worthless cures held to charge violation of postal laws.-Id. 49 (U.S.C.C.A.) In a prosecution for using mails to defraud in disposal of mining stock, issue of which was based on contract to purchase a mine, held that, where accused knew that his vendor could not give possession, and that mortgage had been foreclosed, admission of a transcript of foreclosure proceedings was not error.-Linn v. United States, 309. In a prosecution under Criminal Code, § 215, for using the mails in connection with a scheme to defraud by disposing of worthless mining stock, evidence held to warrant conviction.-Id. VI. AMENDED AND SUPPLEMENTAL PLEADINGS AND REPLEADER. 236(5) (U.S.C.C.A.) In brakeman's action for injuries, the allowance of a trial amendment to charge negligence of the head brakeman as well as the engineer, in conformity to 50 (U.S.C.C.A.) In a prosecution for usproof, held not an abuse of discretion.-Waters v. Guile, 298. XII. ISSUES, PROOF, AND VARIANCE. 398 (U.S.C.C.A.) A variance between pleading and proof is immaterial, unless such as to mislead the opposite party.-Waters v. Guile, 298. PLEDGES. See Factors, 19, 52; Warehousemen, 2, 15. ing the mails in connection with a scheme to defraud, the question whether accused mailed certain letters in connection with his project to dispose of worthless mining stock held for the jury.-Linn v. United States, 309. PRACTICE. For practice in particular actions and proceedings, see the various specific topics. PRECEDENTS. II (U.S.C.C.A.) It is a general rule that a See Courts, 92. pledge, not followed by delivery, actual or symbolical, is invalid against execution levying creditors of the pledgor.-Interstate Banking & Trust Co. v. Brown, 526. POSSESSION. See Admiralty, 8; Fraudulent Conveyances, 139, 165; Navigable Waters, 36. POST OFFICE. PREFERENCES. See Bankruptcy, 160. PREMATURE ACTION. See Admiralty, 33. PRESCRIPTION. See Criminal Law, 371, 394; Indictment See Limitation of Actions. and Information, 99. III. OFFENSES AGAINST POSTAL LAWS. 35 (U.S.C.C.A.) Under Cr. Code, § 215, denouncing offense of using mails in connection with any scheme to defraud, it is not necessary PRESENTMENT. See Bills and Notes, 394, 537. PRESIDENT. that scheme alleged appear on its face to be See Corporations, 406–429. PRESUMPTIONS. See Evidence, 63, 77. For cases in Dec. Dig. & Am. Dig. Key No. Series & Indexes see same topic and KEY-NUMBER See Sales, 340. PRICE. PRINCIPAL AND AGENT. See Brokers; Criminal Law, 1; Factors. II. MUTUAL RIGHTS, DUTIES, AND LIABILITIES. (A) Execution of Agency. 69(3) (U.S.C.C.A.) It is the duty of an agent, in entering into contracts with his principal, to exercise the utmost good faith.-Parker v. Ross, 191. Where the principal understands the transaction, he may give his entire property to his agent.-Id. Where defendant's principal, who transferred to him her entire property. did so intending that he should make a profit, the inadequacy of the consideration for the conveyance will not warrant its vacation.-Id. 79(5) (U.S.C.C.A.) In a suit to set aside a transfer of notes and mortgages on the ground that defendant. an agent, procured it through his fraud, evidence held to show defendant's original fraudulent intent.-Parker v. Ross, 191. The agent of an aged, infirm woman, who occupied towards her a fiduciary relation, has the burden of proving that her convevance to him of her entire property was free and voluntary, and unless this is established it will be set aside.-Id. PRINCIPAL AND SURETY. II. SURVEY AND DISPOSAL OF LANDS OF UNITED STATES. (K) Remedies in Cases of Fraud, Mistake, or Trust. 120 (U.S.C.C.A.) Where the United States has shown that patents to public lands were obtained fraudulently, a subsequent purchaser, claiming through the patentees, has the burden of proving affirmatively that he was a good-faith purchaser.-Northern Colorado Coal Co. v. United States, 50. 120 (U.S.C.C.A.) In a suit by the government for cancellation of patents to coal lands obtained by fraud, the defendant has the burden of establishing the defense that he was a goodfaith purchaser without notice by affirmative evidence.-Hill v. United States, 55. PUBLIC SERVICE CORPORATIONS. See Carriers; Railroads. RAILROADS. See Carriers; Commerce, 8, 27; Constitutional Law, 238, 275; Master and Servant. VII. SALES, LEASES, TRAFFIC CONTRACTS, AND CONSOLIDATION. 138 (U.S.C.C.A.) A traffic contract between two railroad companies to continue for a stated time held to create no lien on the property or income of one of the parties, but to be terminable by its receiver, subject only to a general claim for damages for breach.-Baker v. Central Trust Co. of New York, 511. VIII. INDEBTEDNESS, SECURITIES, LIENS, AND MORTGAGES. (A) Nature and Extent of Liabilities. 171(1) (U.S.C.C.A.) That bondholders of a railroad company purchased with knowledge of a traffic contract between the mortgagor and another company for their benefit held not to give them an equity which entitled them to priority over subsequent lienholders of the latter company.-Baker v. Central Trust Co. of New York, 511. See Partition. REAL ACTIONS. RECEIPTS. See Warehousemen, 2–20. REDEMPTION. See Bankruptcy, 253; Execution, 291. RELEVANCY. See Evidence, 130. RENT. See Bankruptcy, 140. See Indians, 15. RESULTING TRUSTS. See Trusts, 72-372. REVENUE. See Customs Duties; Internal Revenue. REVIEW. See Appeal and Error; Bankruptcy, RISKS. See Master and Servant, 211-226, 280. ROYALTIES. See Patents, 216. RULES OF COURT. See Court Rules Cited. SALES. same should be furnished and delivered f. o. b. cars in Chicago, will be construed according to laws of Illinois.-Northwestern Terra Cotta Co. v. Caldwell, 257. IV. PERFORMANCE OF CONTRACT. (C) Delivery and Acceptance of Goods. 152 (U.S.C.C.A.) Where buyer failed to order from seller coal in quantities as contracted for, to be delivered monthly, and thereafter demanded monthly deliveries in excess of the contract, and threatened suit for failure to deliver, the seller was relieved from any obligation to make further deliveries as for want of proper order.-Alwart Bros. Coal Co. v. Royal Colliery Co., 36. 181(11) (U.S.C.C.A.) Evidence held sufficient to sustain a finding that buyer breached a contract for the sale and delivery of coal, by failing to order the amount of coal contracted for, and that seller was within its rights in canceling the contract.-Alwart Bros. Coal Co. v. Royal Colliery Co., 36. VII. REMEDIES OF SELLER. (E) Actions for Price or Value. 340 (U.S.C.C.A.) To sue on indebitatus assumpsit is not to sue for purchase price of goods sold.-Westinghouse Electric & Mfg. Co. v. Samson Iron Works, 32. (F) Actions for Damages. 382 (U.S.C.C.A.) Where defendant contended that because of plaintiff's delay in furnishing machinery the owner repudiated his contract with it, evidence of conversation between owner and defendant's manager wherein contract was repudiated, was admissible in action for defendant's breach.-Westinghouse Electric & Mfg. Co. v. Samson Iron Works, 32. 441-384(7) (U.S.C.C.A.) Plaintiff suing for defendant's breach of contract to purchase machinery held entitled only to recover damages suffered; title not having passed and plaintiff having disposed of part thereof to third persons. -Westinghouse Electric & Mfg. Co. v. Samson Iron Works, 32. See Bankruptcy, 140; Courts, 388 (U.S.C.C.A.) In action for breach of contract to purchase machinery, part of which was delivered and installed, held that instructions were not objectionable as precluding plaintiff from recovering damages for expenses of installation and removal.-Westinghouse Electric & Mfg. Co. v. Samson Iron Works, 32. IX. CONDITIONAL SALES. 372; Ex-474(2) (U.S.C.C.A.) An unrecorded conditional sale contract for a machine held good as against a prior lien given by the purchaser on after-acquired property.-United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. of Baltimore, Md., v. G. W. Parsons Co., 608. II. CONSTRUCTION OF CONTRACT. 55 (U.S.C.C.A.) A contract, expressly providing that it was not a building contract but for the furnishing of materials to be used in performing a building contract, and that the For cases in Dec. Dig. & Am. Dig. Key No. Series & Indexes see same topic and KEY-NUMBER SEALS. See Municipal Corporations, 927. SEARCHES AND SEIZURES. See Criminal Law, 394. 7 (U.S.C.C.A.) Constitutional rights of petitioner, a Chinese person, held not violated because government witnesses took from the proprietor of the laundry in which he worked a number of letters, which petitioner claimed were not addressed to him.-Moy Wing Sun v. Prentis, 40. SECRETARY OF LABOR. See Habeas Corpus, 30, 92. SERVANTS. See Master and Servant. SERVICE. See Process, 73. SET-OFF AND COUNTERCLAIM. See Courts, 263; Judgment, 622. SETTING ASIDE. See New Trial, 165. SHERMAN ACT. See Monopolies. SHIPPING. Icaused by the dropping of the anchor, which was insecurely fastened.-The Anglo-Patagonian, 586. 85 (U.S.C.C.A.) A charterer, which paid a judgment for injury to a stevedore, held not debarred by insufficiency of notice of the action to the owner of the right to maintain a suit to recover over.-Munson S. S. Line v. Glasgow Nav. Co., 558. As between an owner and time charterer under the terms of the charter party, the owner held liable for injury to a stevedore resulting from the negligence of a winchman.—Id. VII. CARRIAGE OF GOODS. 110 (U.S.C.C.A.) The sinking of a car float while being loaded with loaded cars at a float bridge of respondent railroad company under direction of its train conductor held due to his negligent method of loading, for which respondent was liable.-Lehigh Valley R. Co. v. Brooklyn Eastern Dist. Terminal, 212. 121(2) (U.S.C.C.A.) Damage to cargo from sea water entering through a hole where the iron hull plates had been eaten through by corrosion from the inside held due to unseaworthiness, for which charterer and owner were liable.-The Julia Luckenbach, 650. 141(4) (U.S.C.C.A.) The owner of a vessel, who has by a time charter contracted to maintain her in a seaworthy condition, cannot limit his liability for a loss due to her unseaworthiness.-The Julia Luckenbach, 650. 150 (U.S.C.C.A.) In view of libelant's knowledge of defendant's contracts of affreightment with other companies and of the previous method of doing business, held, that defendant, though it accepted coal transported in libelant's vessel, for which a bill of lading had been issued, S. S. Co. v. Central Coal Co., 46. See Admiralty; Collision; Insurance, ~607; was not liable for the freight charges.-Frontier Wharves. III. CHARTERS. VIII. CARRIAGE OF PASSENGERS. to 45 (U.S.C.C.A.) In the absence of agreement or binding custom to the contrary, it is the duty166(1) (U.S.C.C.A.) For a shipowner of the owner to load a chartered ship, provided leave a loose mat sliding about a passageway the ship is not demised.-Munson S. S. Line v. used by passengers when a violent storm was Glasgow Nav. Co., 558. raging was negligence.-Compagnie Générale Transatlantique v. Bump, 68. 47 (U.S.C.C.A.) In the absence of agreement or binding custom to the contrary, it is the duty of the owner to discharge a chartered ship, provided the ship is not demised.-Munson S. S. Line v. Glasgow Nav. Co., 558. 54 (U.S.C.C.A.) A time charterer of a scow, under a charter party containing no covenant for her return in good order and condition, can be held liable for her injury only on the ground of negligence.-C. F. Harms Co. v. Upper Hudson Stone Co., 457. V. LIABILITIES OF VESSELS AND OWNERS IN GENERAL. 84(3) (U.S.C.C.A.) A steamship held liable for injury to a workman employed with others by the master to clean the ship at night, and who fell into an open hatchway because of the unsafe condition of the deck and the insufficient light furnished.-The Themistocles, 575. Where the servants of a shipowner placed a passenger in a position exposing her to injury, and under the circumstances she was unable to help herself, the shipowner is liable for not extending to her required protection.-Id. 166(5) (U.S.C.C.A.) In an action for injuries received by a passenger on a ship, questions of the shipowner's negligence and of the passenger's contributory negligence held for the jury.Compagnie Générale Transatlantique v. Bump, 68. 168 (U.S.C.C.A.) Evidence held insufficient to sustain a libel by the United States against a steamer under Rev. St. § 4499 (Comp. St. 1913, § 8275), to recover the penalty for carrying more passengers than allowed by the vessel's inspection certificate.-The Seneca, 214. SIGNALS. 84(3) (U.S.C.C.A.) A ship held liable for injuries to workmen making repairs in dry dock, See Collision, 100. SIGNATURES. See Municipal Corporations, 927. SPECIAL DEPOSITS. See Banks and Banking, 153. SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE. II. CONTRACTS ENFORCEABLE. umph Electric Co. v. Thullen, 568. STARE DECISIS. See Courts, 92. STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS. STATUTES. 1890, July 2, ch. 647, §§ 7, 8, 26 Stat. 210 955 1897, June 7, ch. 4, § 1, art. 27, 30 Stat. 544. 161 459 1898, July 1, ch. 541, § 1(15), 30 Stat. 544 645 526 40 1907, March 4, ch. 2939, 34 Stat. 1415.. 350 1908, April 22, ch. 149, 35 Stat. 65. For statutes relating to particular subjects, see 1908, April 22, ch. 149, 35 Stat. 65. VI. CONSTRUCTION AND OPERA- TION. (A) General Rules of Construction. 228 (U.S.C.C.A.) All that is not clearly em- STATUTES CONSTRUED. UNITED STATES. 350 25 1909, Aug. 5, ch. 6, § 38, 36 Stat. 112. 1882, May 6, ch. 126, § 6, 22 Stat. 60..... 1884, May 17, ch. 53, § 8, 23 Stat. 26.. For cases in Dec. Dig. & Am. Dig. Key No. 40 $ 4313 361 §§ 5949-5951 95 7892 40 §§ 8030, 8031. Series & Indexes see same topic and KEY-NUMBER 595 50 356 214 109 399 245 440 595 44 40 384 40 50 366 454 356 356 161 459 650 |