ÆäÀÌÁö À̹ÌÁö
PDF
ePub

state or subdivisions thereof.-Barton v. Edwards, 179 S. W. 354.

Under Declaration of Rights, § 22, and Const. art. 12, § 9, payment in money before taking of property by county held not required, and payment in depreciated county warrants is sufficient. Id.

Property taken for road held not taken without compensation, though quorum court had made no specific appropriation for expenditures on roads; the owner having a remedy by compelling levy of an appropriation.-Id.

entire case.-Consolidation Coal Co. v. Vanover, 179 S. W. 43.

381 (Ky.) The verdict of a jury on a ques tion of fact submitted out of chancery in ar equity case is merely advisory and may be disregarded by the chancellor.-Consolidation Coal Co. v. Vanover, 179 S. W. 43.

385 (Ark.) It was within the discretion of the chancellor to allow the introduction of evidence after the cause had been submitted and taken under advisement.-Fromholz v. McGahey, 179 S. W. 360.

ERROR, WRIT OF.

(D) Persons Entitled and Payment. 157 (Ky.) The value of the widow's interest in a fund awarded for condemnation of part of See Appeal and Error. the land allotted to her as dower is determined by Ky. St. 1915, table 3, p. 2465, showing present cash value of a life estate, in the fund, and not by table 4, page 2466, applicable before allotment of dower.-Dyer v. Dyer, 179 S. W. 453.

IV. REMEDIES OF OWNERS OF

PROPERTY.

295 (Tex.Civ.App.) In an action by an abutting owner for damages due to construction of a railroad in the street, the burden was upon him to allege and prove that an instrument executed by his authority, constituting a relinquishment of damages, was revoked, and that the railroad had notice thereof.-Quanah, A. & P. Ry. Co. v. Dickey, 179. S. W. 69.

307 (Tex. Civ.App.) Whether

ESTATES.

See Curtesy; Deeds, 124, 129; Descent and
Distribution; Estoppel, 38; Execution,

33; Executors and Administrators; Life Estates; Mortgages, 12, 139; Perpetuities; Remainders; Taxation, 866; Tenancy in Common; Wills.

ESTOPPEL.

See Appeal and Error, 882; Corporations,
34, 388, 425; Criminal Law, 1137;
Principal and Agent, 25, 137; Trial,
251; Wills, 230.

II. BY DEED.

plaintiff's (A) Creation and Operation in General. property was depreciated by reason of the con-21 (Tex.Civ.App.) A grantor in a deed, abstruction of a railroad held, under the evidence, solute in form but in fact a mortgage, signing as for the jury.-Houston Belt & Terminal Ry. a witness a deed to a grantee of the mortgagee, Co. v. Vogel, 179 S. W. 268. was not estopped to assert that it was a mortgage; the subsequent grantee having notice.McLemore v. Bickerstaff, 179 S. W. 536. (B) Estates and Rights Subsequently Ac

EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY ACTS. See Commerce, 8, 27; Limitation of Actions,130.

EMPLOYÉS.

See Master and Servant.

ENTIRETY, ESTATE BY.

See Husband and Wife, 14.

EQUAL PROTECTION OF THE LAWS.
See Constitutional Law, 211-241.

EQUITABLE ESTOPPEL.

See Estoppel, 54-114.

EQUITY.

quired.

38 (Mo.App.) Defendant, in an action for damages for breach of warranty of title, who had acquired his title under a void trust deed from certain infant heirs to whom the plaintiff afterwards surrendered title, held estopped to deny that such heirs were the holders of the paramount title.-Eaker v. Harvey, 179 S. W. 985.

III. EQUITABLE ESTOPPEL.

(A) Nature and Essentials in General. 54 (Tex.Civ.App.) Husband, though in plaintiff's store when wife purchased alleged necessaries, held not estopped from defeating liability, if he did not know the goods were being charged to him.-Trammell v. Neiman-Marcus Co., 179 S. W. 271.

See Appeal and Error, 515, 895, 1009; Can-58 (Tex. Civ.App.) An equitable estoppel cancellation of Instruments; Contribution; Es- not be invoked except to protect the party claimtoppel, 54-114; Injunction; Interplead- ing its benefit from some loss resulting if the er; Judgment, 416-461; Ne Exeat; true facts control.-McLemore v. Bickerstaff, Quieting Title; Reformation of Instruments: 179 S. W. 536. Sequestration; Subrogation; Trusts.

(B) Grounds of Estoppel.

I. JURISDICTION, PRINCIPLES, AND 68 (Mo.App.) Subsequent mortgagor of fur

MAXIMS.

(A) Nature, Grounds, Subjects, and Extent of Jurisdiction in General.

39 (Mo.App.) Equity, having jurisdiction of action for rescission of contract entered into during minority and for cancellation of plaintiff's notes, chattel mortgage, etc., held to have power to dispose of all questions involved, including the entry of a money judgment.-Moser v. Renner, 179 S. W. 970.

VIII. HEARING, SUBMISSION OF IS-
SUES TO JURY, AND REHEARING.

377 (Ky.) Where desirable to submit an issue of fact to a jury in an equity case, the proper practice is to order an issue out of chancery submitting only the question of fact and not the

niture, who escaped conviction for selling it as unincumbered on plea that he signed papers on understanding that they related to other property, could not set up that such papers were a new note and mortgage in substitution for the first note and mortgage.-Western Auction & Storage Co. v. Shore, 179 S. W. 769.

93 (Tex. Civ.App.) An abutting owner held estopped to claim damages for the construction of a railroad past his property by subscribing to a fund to induce such construction and for relinquishment of damages therefor.-Quanah, A. & P. Ry. Co. v. Dickey, 179 S. W. 69.

(E) Pleading, Evidence, Trial, and Review.

107 (Tex.Civ.App.) One claiming title by estoppel must plead and prove the facts creating.

an estoppel.-McLemore v. Bickerstaff, 179 S. W. 536.

use, was admissible as to the capacity of freight cars.-McLaughlin v. Terrell Bros., 179 S. W. 932.

114 (Tex. Civ.App.) Where defendant merely denied that alleged agent was its agent, estoppel 185 (Tex.Civ.App.) Where, in suit to forewith respect to extent of his authority held close vendor's lien, plaintiff alleged the original available to plaintiff though not pleaded.-In- deed was in defendant's possession, and that the ternational Fire Insurance Co. v. Black, 179 latter had been duly notified to produce it S. W. 534. and had failed, there was a proper predicate for secondary evidence of its contents.-Stewart v. Thomas, 179 S. W. 886.

See Witnesses.

EVIDENCE.

For evidence as to particular facts or issues or
in particular actions or proceedings, see also
the various specific topics.

For review of rulings relating to evidence, see
Appeal and Error.

Reception at trial, see Criminal Law,
683; Trial, 76-85.

1. JUDICIAL NOTICE.

VII. ADMISSIONS.

(A) Nature, Form, and Incidents in General.

211 (Mo.App.) The testimony of the prede673-cessor in title of plaintiffs in unlawful detainer, bearing on the issue whether such predecessor verbally rented the premises to defendant, given in a prior suit for rent, was admissible.-McCracken v. Schuster, 179 S. W. 757.

5 (Ky.) The court may take judicial notice, as of a matter of common knowledge, that a sand pile was an attractive nuisance to children two or three years of age.-Gnau v. Ackerman, 179 S. W. 217.

32 (Ky.) Under Ky. St. § 2775, held, that Louisville city ordinance need not be introduced in evidence; the court taking judicial notice thereof. Gnau v. Ackerman, 179 S. W. 217.

II. PRESUMPTIONS.

67 (Tex.Civ.App.) Where a power is shown to have existed, it will be presumed that it continues, and that third parties, without notice of a revocation thereof, are justified in so presuming.-Quanah, A. & P. Ry. Co. v. Dickey,

179 S. W. 69.

IV. RELEVANCY, MATERIALITY, AND
COMPETENCY IN GENERAL.

(B) Res Gestæ.

(C) By Grantors, Former Owners, or Privies.

231 (Mo.App.) In replevin for furniture claimed under a chattel mortgage, defendant was not bound by the mortgagor's admissions after he conveyed the title to one from whom defendant took title.-Western Auction & Storage Co. v. Shore, 179 S. W. 769.

(D) By Agents or Other Representatives.
248 (Tex. Civ.App.) Admissions of divorced
wife in pleadings and evidence that goods pur-
chased during marriage were necessaries held
not conclusive against the husband.-Trammell
v. Neiman-Marcus Co.. 179 S. W. 271.
of
253 (Ky.) Declarations a conspirator
made after the purposes of the conspiracy are
terminated cannot be proved against a co-con-
spirator.-Cole v. Collins, 179 S. W. 607.

(E) Proof and Effect.

128 (Ky.) Evidence of statements by assured to physician as to the cause of the injury resulting in death held competent in an action258 (Ky.) In an action against a railroad by a beneficiary on the policy.-Massachusetts Bonding & Insurance Co. v. Duncan, 179 S. W.

472.

(C) Similar Facts and Transactions.

129 (Mo.App.) In action to cancel because of usury notes and mortgage on household furniture given by plaintiff to defendant, evidence that a third person was agent for defendant in that a third person was agent for defendant in another transaction held admissible to show agency in the transaction in issue.-Riepe v. Vette, 179 S. W. 952.

and trainmen for a death caused by an engine step, testimony that witness heard testimony at inquest of person said to be one of the trainmen that the engine step was loose before the accident held inadmissible, unless the witness identified the trainmen.-Cincinnati, N. O. & T. P. Ry. Co. v. Frogg's Adm'r, 179 S. W. 1062.

260 (Ky.) In a civil proceeding founded on conspiracy the conspiracy must be proved otherwise than by the testimony of a conspirator before his acts and declarations are admissible against a co-conspirator.-Cole v. Collins, 179 S. W. 607.

130 (Tex. Civ.App.) It is not error to exclude from evidence a letter written to defend-265 (Mo.App.) That person claiming to ant by its agent in regard to plaintiff's claim have been struck by defendant's automobile told for damages, for the letter is res inter alios him that she was not hurt, and later that she acta. Missouri, K. & T. Ry. Co. of Texas v. had no grievance against him, held not concluA. E. Want & Co., 179 S. W. 903. sive against her, but only a circumstance for the jury's consideration.-Ginter v. O'Donoghue, 179 S. W. 732.

(D) Materiality.

IX. HEARSAY.

143 (Tex.Civ.App.) In trover and conversion, testimony as to market value of certain grass seed held inadmissible as being too weak to be considered.-First Nat. Bank of Plain-314 (Tex.Civ.App.) Except in cases of pediview v. McWhorter, 179 S. W. 1147.

(E) Competency.

155 (Ky.) Where defendant denied signing note for alleged loan and sought to show that plaintiff did not have the means to make the loan, testimony of bank cashier as to plaintiff's deposit therein held competent.-Shelby v. Grabble, 179 S. W. 1.

V. BEST AND SECONDARY EVIDENCE. 158 (Tex.Civ.App.) In an, action for the price of wood in which defendant claimed shortage, a copy of the American Railway Equipment Register, with testimony to its general

gree, relationship, marriage, death, age, and boundaries, hearsay evidence is inadmissible.Pulkrabeck v. Griffith & Griffith, 179 S. W. 282.

317 (Tex. Civ.App.) In action against brokers for share of commission, defendant's testimony that party who brought in purchaser stated plaintiff had not sent him held hearsay and inadmissible.-Pulkrabeck v. Griffith & Griffith, 179 S. W. 282.

317 (Tex. Civ.App.) In trover by a wife for grass seed seized for her husband's debts, evidence by plaintiff as to the value of such seed, based upon information received by her through others, was inadmissible as hearsay.-First Nat.

Bank of Plainview v. McWhorter, 179 S. W. 1147.

318 (Tex.Civ.App.) In an action for wood sold f. o. b. cars at A., in the absence of evidence as to the correctness of the statement in freight bills of the railroad as to the number of cords of wood on arrival at H., the exclusion of such bills was proper.-McLaughlin v. Terrell Bros., 179 S. W. 932.

XI. PAROL OR EXTRINSIC EVI-
DENCE AFFECTING WRITINGS.

(A) Contradicting, Varying, or Adding to
Terms of Written Instrument.

397 (Ky.) Prior negotiations and agreements are merged by the execution of a written contract deliberately covering the subject-matter, and, in the absence of fraud or mistake, parol or extrinsic evidence is not admissible to vary or contradict its terms.-Citizens' Trust & Guaranty Co. v. Farmers' Bank of Estill

In an action for the price of wood, in which defendant claimed shortage, a copy of the American Railway Equipment Register, with testi-County, 179 S. W. 29. mony to its general use, was admissible as to the capacity of freight cars.-Id.

A railway equipment register as to the dimensions of cars being admissible, it was proper to admit a memorandum, condensing the information desired, from the book.-Id.

323 (Ark.) A witness may testify as to the market value of fruits at a given time; his information being based on market reports.-St. Louis, I. M. & S. R. Co. v. Laser Grain Co., 179 S. W. 189.

The written contract which will merge prior agreements and render inadmissible parol eviparticular form, contained in one paper, or dence varying its terms need not be in any signed by both parties.-Id.

400 (Tex.Civ.App.) A seller may by written contract limit his warranty of the article sold, and, in the absence of fraud, accident, or mistake, parol evidence is not admissible to vary or contradict this contract.-Bolt v. State Savings Bank of Manchester, lowa, 179 S. W. 1119.

419 (Tenn.) In a suit to recover for a deficiency in a parcel of land, the price per acre may be shown by parol, though not stated in the deed; the real contract between the parties governing.-Caughron v. Stinespring, 179 S. W.

152.

X. DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE. (C) Private Writings and Publications. 352 (Mo.App.) In a switchman's action for injuries while coupling cars under the Federal Employers' Liability Act, railroad records as 419 (Tex.Civ.App.) Parol evidence of the to the movement of the car held admissible, real consideration of a written contract is adwhere their identity and correctness had been missible, although it contradicts the consideraproperly attested. Trowbridge v. Kansas City tion named in the contract.-Blair & Hughes & W. B. Ry. Co., 179 S. W. 777. Co. v. Watkins & Kelley, 179 S. W. 530.

the legal effect of a blank indorsement cannot be changed by parol evidence.-First Nat. Bank of Grant City v. Korn, 179 S. W. 721.

354 (Tex. Civ.App.) In an action for the 423 (Mo.App.) Under Rev. St. 1909, § 10033, price of lumber sold, plaintiff's daybook, or journal, containing the first permanent entry of sales items taken from slips made out by yardmen, held admissible as a book of original entry.-Scruggs v. E. L. Woodley Lumber Co., 179 S. W. 897.

Books of account are not admissible under the rule admitting accounts kept by the parties, where they do not contain items and charges made in the regular course of business.-Id.

In action for price of lumber, addition to name of party charged of the word "residence" held not such an alteration as to render plaintiff's account book inadmissible.-Id.

(B) Invalidating Written Instrument.

433 (Tex.Civ.App.) Where transfer of partner's interest in business was not intended to cover only part of the transaction, and omis sion of a transfer of claims resulted from mistake, held that such transfer could not be shown by parol.-City of Brownsville v. Tumlinson, 179 S. W. 1107.

434 (Ark.) Where the defendant alleges 359 (Tex. Civ.App.) Explanation of evifraud and misrepresentations in the procuredence of physician attending plaintiff switch- ment of a contract, parol evidence is admissible man, injured while in the employ of the defend- to show the deceit, although it varies the writant, by X-ray photographs of plaintiff's anato- ten contract.-Barker v. Lack, 179 S. W. 493. my after injury, is admissible, if preliminary 434 (Tex.Civ.App.) Where fraud is alleged evidence has established the correctness of the photographs.-Pecos & N. T. Ry. Co. v. Winkler, 179 S. W. 691.

(D) Production, Authentication, and Ef

fect.

366 (Tex. Civ.App.) In an action for damages for negligent transportation of stock, it is not error to exclude government reports of tests of shrinkage of stock in transportation, where there is nothing to show that they are accurate, authentic, or that the tests embraced therein were made under similar conditions.Missouri, K. & T. Ry. Co. of Texas v. Dale Bros. Land & Cattle Co., 179 S. W. 935.

368 (Ky.) Refusal to order production of books of bank after cashier had testified without objection from a memorandum concerning a deposit in the bank held not error.-Shelby v. Grabble, 179 S. W. 1.

383 (Tex.Civ.App.) A pamphlet or other document, purporting to have been used by the government or under the authority of some department of the government, has, prima facie, no more weight as evidence, nor greater authenticity or verity, than documents issued by other authority.-Missouri, K. & T. Ry. Co. of Texas v. Dale Bros. Land & Cattle Co., 179 S.

in the answer to an action on a note with respect to the plaintiff's representation as to the application of collateral, parol evidence of the agreement was admissible.-First State Bank of Amarillo v. Cooper, 179 S. W. 295.

434 (Tex. Civ.App.) Parol evidence of fraudulent representations inducing an order for goods held admissible, although the order stipulates that all its conditions appear upon its face.-Blair & Hughes Co. v. Watkins & Kelley, 179 S. W. 530.

434 (Tex. Civ.App.) Purchaser sued for purchase price, in support of plea of failure of consideration, held entitled to show by parol material misrepresentations.-Bolt v. State Savings Bank of Manchester, Iowa, 179 S. W. 1119.

(C) Separate or Subsequent Oral Agreement.

441 (Ark.) A note absolute on its face cannot be varied by parol agreement, that satisfaction should be sought out of mortgaged property.-Smith v. McLaughlin, 179 S. W. 496.

441 (Ky.) In action to recover purchase price of goods sold, answer setting up collateral parol agreement held bad for failure to allege its omission through fraud or mistake from purchase contract.-Louisville Trust Co. v. Bayer

441 (Tex.Civ.App.) The terms of a promis- | questions as to the distance in which a car sory note are conclusive of the contract, and could be stopped upon the assumption that the cannot be changed by parol evidence of an rails were dry, when there was indirect eviunderstanding that it was never to be paid.- dence thereof. Ingino v. Metropolitan St. Ry. Lockney State Bank v. Damron, 179 S. W. 552. Co., 179 S. W. 771. 441 (Tex. Civ. App.) Written warranty of horse, executed as part of contract of sale, (F) Effect of Opinion Evidence. held to exclude any warranty not therein con- 568 (Tex.Civ.App.) A jury are not concludtained, as well as evidence of fraudulent rep-ed by opinion evidence, but may apply their resentations.-Bolt v. State Savings Bank of own experience and knowledge in solving the Manchester, Iowa, 179 S. W. 1119. question.-Houston Belt & Terminal Ry. Co. v. Vogel, 179 S. W. 268.

442 (Tex. Civ. App.) Evidence held insufficient to show that written transfer of partner's interest in business purported to express only a part of the transaction so as to authorize parol proof of a transfer of the claim sued on. -City of Brownsville v. Tumlinson, 179 S. W. 1107.

(D) Construction or Application of Language of Written Instrument.

459 (Ky.) Where contract was in the name of a company, it might be shown by parol who the members of the alleged company were and whom it was intended to bind.-Geary v. Taylor, 179 S. W. 426.

XIII. EVIDENCE AT FORMER TRIAL
OR IN OTHER PROCEEDING.

577 (Ky.) It is error to permit a transcript of evidence at a former trial to be read where there is nothing to show that the witness whose testimony is read could not be produced.-Liverpool & London & Globe Ins. Co. v. Wright, 179 S. W. 49.

580 (Ark.) In action to quiet title, as against defendant's claim under a decree of divorce from her husband, under whose conveyance plaintiffs claimed, testimony in divorce suit held inadmissible.-West v. West, 179 S. W. 1017.

XIV. WEIGHT AND SUFFICIENCY.

462 (Mo.App.) Manufacturing company's advertisement for agent, and correspondence leading up to contract with resident of South Carolina, could be considered to resolve ambiguity588 (Mo.App.) In an action for injuries to in the contract as to whether it appointed a sales agent or provided for the sale of goods. Watkins v. Donnell, 179 S. W. 980.

XII. OPINION EVIDENCE. (A) Conclusions and Opinions of Witnesses in General.

471 (Tex.Civ.App.) In an action on a note, where one of the issues of fact and law was whether one M. was a principal or a surety, his statement that he was a surety involved a legal

conclusion.-First State Bank of Amarillo v. Cooper, 179 S. W. 295.

471 (Tex. Civ.App.) Admission of portion of answer of witness, which, taken alone, appeared to be opinion as to meaning of a third person's statements, but which, in view of the entire answer, merely stated what such third person had said, was proper.-Postal Telegraph Cable Co. of Texas v. De Krekko, 179 S. W. 525.

471 (Tex.Civ.App.) A question inquiring of defendant whether he had any agreement with plaintiff whatever, or gave him any right to the property in controversy, was not objectionable as calling for a conclusion.-Hall v. Ray, 179 S. W. 1135.

person struck by street car, plaintiff held not entitled to recover on testimony that car was not in sight when he looked, when the testimony could not be true.-Guffey v. Harvey, 179 S. W. 729.

589 (Tex. Civ.App.) In an action between partners for an accounting, the court could refuse credence to defendant's statement, totally uncorroborated, that he made a disbursement.Navarro v. Lamana, 179 S. W. 922.

[blocks in formation]

See Appeal and Error, 272, 501; Criminal Law, 844, 922; Pleading, 228; Trial, 366.

EXCEPTIONS, BILL OF.

See Appeal and Error, 548-553, 569; Criminal Law, 1090–1092.

EXCESSIVE DAMAGES.

472 (Tex.Civ.App.) In an action on a note, where one of the issues of fact and law was See Damages, 130–132. whether one M. was a principal or a surety, his statement that he was a surety invaded the province of the jury.-First State Bank of Amarillo v. Cooper, 179 S. W. 295.

EXCLUSIVE FRANCHISES.

See Municipal Corporations, 682.

EXCUSABLE HOMICIDE.

474 (Tex. Civ.App.) Plaintiff who testified to his familiarity with conditions and knowledge of the market value held competent to tes- See Homicide, 110-122. tify as to the market value of his property, though he became confused on cross-examination as to difference between market and actual value.-Houston Belt & Terminal Ry. Co. v. Vogel, 179 S. W. 268.

(B) Subjects of Expert Testimony.

506 (Mo.App.) In an action against street railroad for personal injury from a collision, offer of the facts which an expert medical witness had discovered on his examination, and his admissible opinions as an expert, held not objectionable as invading the province of the jury. Michaels v. Harvey, 179 S. W. 735.

(D) Examination of Experts. 553 (Mo.App.) In an action for injuries to an occupant of a wagon in a collision at a street crossing, it was not error to predicate

EXECUTION.

See Attachment; Courts, 189; Fraudulent
Conveyances. 241; Garnishment; Home-
stead; Judicial Sales; Justices of the Peace,
135; Sheriffs and Constables, 106.

I. NATURE, AND ESSENTIALS
IN GENERAL.

12 (Mo.App.) Where the judgment on which an execution rests is annulled, the execution falls.-Francis v. Francis, 179 S. W. 975.

II. PROPERTY SUBJECT TO EXECU-
TION.

33 (Tex.) A vested remainder is subject to execution against the remaindermen.-Caples v. Ward, 179 S. W. 856.

V. STAY, QUASHING, VACATING,
AND RELIEF AGAINST EX-

ECUTION.

first being raised by objection to evidence, held sufficient.-Biggerstaff v. Riley, 179 S. W. 744. EXEMPTIONS.

172 (Tex.Civ.App.) In a suit to restrain a See Homestead; Taxation, 241, 242. sale under execution, evidence held to justify a temporary injunction and refusal to dissolve it. -Whitaker v. Hill, 179 S. W. 539.

VI. CLAIMS BY THIRD PERSONS.

EXHUMATION.

See Insurance, 549.

184 (Tex. Civ.App.) Amendment of claimEXPERT TESTIMONY. ant's oath, setting up claim to property levied See Evidence, 506, 553. on under execution to include allegation that he was also acting for his minor brother, held properly permitted.-Grisham v. Ward, 179 S. W. 893.

201 (Tex.Civ.App.) On trial of claim to property levied on under execution, agreement by claimants to pay the judgments by the delivery of such property held enforceable.-Grisham v. Ward, 179 S. W. 893.

EXECUTORS AND ADMINISTRATORS.
See Descent and Distribution; Wills; Wit-
nesses, mm 138.

II. APPOINTMENT, QUALIFICATION,
AND TENURE.

EXPLOSIVES.

See Master and Servant, 107, 190, 265.

8 (Tex.) A member of a city fire department, injured by one of a series of explosions constituting a continuing negligent act on defendant's part, held not negligent in entering upon the premises.-Houston Belt & Terminal Ry. Co. v. Johansen, 179 S. W. 853.

See Brokers.

FACTORS.

FALSE IMPRISONMENT.

I. CIVIL LIABILITY.

(A) Acts Constituting False Imprisonment and Liability Therefor.

(Tenn.) Under Shannon's Code, § 3935, See Malicious Prosecution. an administrator of a nonresident may be appointed in a county in which there are no assets except a cause of action for wrongful death in that county.-Sharp v. Cincinnati, N. O. & T. P. Ry. Co., 179 S. W. 375. "Estate," as used in Shannon's Code, § 3935, 15 (Ky.) A railroad responsible for the apsubd. 4, as to appointment of administrator where any suit is to be brought or defended in which the estate is interested, defined.-Id.

pointment 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.

(Tenn.) Administrator to sue for wrong-ficer
ful death of nonresident killed in another state
held appointable wherever defendant may be
found in the state. Howard v. Nashville, C. &
St. L. Ry. Co., 179 S. W. 380.

IV. COLLECTION AND MANAGEMENT
OF ESTATE.

Railroad employé summoned by special railway police officer without authority and assisting in ejecting and arresting a passenger held liable as a trespasser.-Id.

In view of Ky. St. § 3755, railroad held responsible for acts of special police officer whose office had been vacated for failure to take oath, etc.-Id.

(B) Actions.

(C) Personal Property. 164 (Ky.) Failure to deliver stock certificate within 10 days after executor's sale did not release purchaser from liability on bid; time not being of the essence of the contract of sale.24 (Ky.) In an action against a carrier and Ohio Valley Banking & Trust Co. v. Wathen's its special police officer for wrongful arrest, Ex'rs, 179 S. W. 230. Executor held to have reasonable time after where the evidence justified compensatory damsale to deliver stock certificates.-Id. ages only, evidence as to the officer's motive in making the arrest was inadmissible.-Cincinnati, N. O. & T. P. Ry. Co. v. Cundiff, 179 S. W. 615.

167 (Ky.) The purchaser of stock at an executor's sale has the right to demand the identical shares purchased.-Ohio Valley Banking & Trust Co. v. Wathen's Ex'rs, 179 S. W. 230.35 (Ky.) Where defendant carrier's special police officer and another employé used no unVI. ALLOWANCE AND PAYMENT OF necessary force or any insulting language, etc., in ejecting and arresting a passenger, punitive CLAIMS. damages were not recoverable.-Cincinnati, N. O. & T. P. Ry. Co. v. Cundiff, 179 S. W. 615. 36 (Ky.) Verdict of $4,000 for passenger's wrongful ejection and arrest without excessive force or brutal treatment held excessive.-Cincinnati, N. O. & T. P. Ry. Co. v. Cundiff, 179 S. W. 615.

(A) Liabilities of Estate. 206 (Mo.App.) Where a grandfather agreed that his grandson who was supporting and nursing him, should be paid from his estate on his death, the grandson was entitled to compensation though unable to receive it in the form expected.-Biggerstaff v. Riley, 179 S. W. 744.

FALSE PRETENSES.
See Criminal Law, 372.

221 (Mo.App.) In an action against a decedent's estate by his grandson for services in working his farm and nursing him, evidence held sufficient to support finding that the parties had 7 (Ark.) To make out the offense of obtainexpress understanding that the services ing money by false pretenses, the pretense must should be compensated.-Biggerstaff v. Riley, be of a past event or of a present fact, and not 179 S. W. 744. a future promise.-Lawson v. State, 179 S. W. 818.

(B) Presentation and Allowance. 227 (Mo.App.) Demand filed in probate court embodying claim for services about decedent's farm, nursing, and for board and provisions furnished, unattacked by motion before

Where defendant falsely represented himself to be a revenue officer, that it was his power and duty to arrest witness, but that he would end the matter on payment to him of $300, which was given him he was guilty of obtaining

« ÀÌÀü°è¼Ó »