VIII. SALES AND CONVEYANCES UN-
DER ORDER OF COURT.

(C) Sale.

367 (Mich.) An executrix's sale of real es-
tate subject to dower and homestead rights for
debts is not void, where debts actually existed,
though widow may not claim or had any home
stead right, and estate received too little and
widow too much from sale's proceeds.-Rasor v.
Mott, 163 N. W. 38.

XIII. LIABILITIES ON ADMINISTRA-
TION BONDS.

16 (N.D.) There is no legal objection to a
written contract requiring party receiving pianos
to be sold on commission to keep them insured
with loss payable to the consignor to the amount
of the price.-Getts v. Champion, 163 N. W. '
263.
FALSE PRETENSES.

532 (Iowa) Under an executrix's bond giv-
en by order of court to secure payment of cer- 51 (Mich.) In prosecution for obtaining
tain claims, the liability of the surety was not check by false representations to drawer that
dependent upon the executrix's failure to prop- defendant had shipped him fence posts, where
erly administer, although the portion of the no posts had been received by drawer, it was
bond securing such payment was written in competent for jury to determine beyond rea-
long hand and was preceded by the word "or" sonable doubt that defendant's representation
and followed the printed form commonly used that he had shipped posts was false.-People v.
by executors.-Tewksbury_v. Title Guaranty & Perry, 163 N. W. 478.
Surety Co. of Scranton, Pa., 163 N. W. 435.

FALSE SWEARING.

FEDERAL EMPLOYERS' LIA-
BILITY ACT.

537(7) (Iowa) In action on executrix's bond
for payment of claims against estate, any error
in failing to join other claimants named in the See Perjury.
bond was obviated by their appearance and
stipulation consenting to payment of plaintiff's
claim and agreeing that, if their claims were
finally allowed in excess of defendant's liabil-
ity on the bond, they would accept the amount
for which defendant was liable in full pro rata.
-Tewksbury v. Title Guaranty & Surety Co.
of Scranton, Pa., 163 N. W. 435.

EXEMPTIONS.

See Attachment, 249; Homestead; Munici-
pal Corporations, 434.

I. NATURE AND EXTENT.

(B) Persons Entitled.

16 (Iowa) The husband and father who re-

See Attorney and Client, 182; Master and
Servant, 204.

FEES.

See Attorney and Client, 155, 175-181; Di-
vorce, 131; Sheriffs and Constables,

69.

FELLOW SERVANTS.

See Master and Servant, 177, 192,

FINAL JUDGMENT.

sides with and supports his wife and children See Appeal and Error, 79.
is the "head of the family," although the wife
under some circumstances may become the head
of the family.-Armstrong-McClenahan Co. v.
Rhoads, 163 N. W. 356.

FINDINGS.

See Appeal and Error, 219, 1071; Trusts,
357.

FIREMEN.

A husband who was separated from his wife
by a decree of divorce which awarded her the
custody of the children, who had conveyed his
equity in his former homestead to the parents See Municipal Corporations, 200.
of his divorced wife in consideration of which
they agreed to support his minor children, was
not a head of a family so as to claim exemption
of 90 days' wages from garnishment.-Id.

FIRE PROTECTION.

See Indictment and Information, 111; Inn-
keepers, 15.

FIRES.

(C) Property and Rights Exempt.
45 (Iowa) If a traction engine is one of the
instrumentalities by which an execution debtor See Municipal Corporations, 200.
habitually earns a living for himself and fam-
ily, it is exempt from execution.-Vandeventer
v. Nelson, 163 N. W. 354.

A threshing machine used to thresh his own
grain by a farmer and to thresh that of others
for hire is not exempt from execution.-Id.

IV. PROTECTION AND ENFORCE-
MENT OF RIGHTS.

116 (Iowa) In spite of Code, § 3991, as to
the officer's duty in levying an execution, re-
quiring notice from the defendant of the ex-
emption, a defendant did not, under section
4017, waive his right to damages for wrongful
levy because of his failure to give the notice.-
Vandeventer v. Nelson, 163 N. W. 354.

149 (N.D.) Where one levies on and sells
property known to be exempt in disregard of
law, a jury may award exemplary damages.-
Stringer v. Elsaas, 163 N. W. 558.

EXPERT TESTIMONY.

See Criminal Law, 474-489; Evidence,
508-553.

≈15 (Mich.) A tenant has a right to remove
trade fixtures.-Waverly Park Amusement Co.
v. Michigan United Traction Co., 163 N. W.
917.

To constitute any chattel a trade fixture, it is
only necessary that it be devoted to trade pur-
pose, and its form or size is immaterial.-Id.

Where a tenant of the lessee had under his
lease the right to remove trade fixtures of an
amusement park, and before expiration of his
lease or that of the lessee, he sold such fixtures

to a subsequent lessee of the same landlord, he
acted within his rights.-Id.

Structures constituted trade fixtures of amuse-
ment park sold by sublessee to subsequent lessee
of the landlord before termination of the original
lease or the sublease held not realty, but prop-
erty of the subsequent lessee.-Id.

FRAUD.

See Bills and Notes, 520; Brokers, 65,
102; Evidence, 434; False Pretenses;
Frauds, Statute of; Fraudulent Conveyances;
Limitation of Actions, 100; Vendor and
Purchaser, 33.

I. DECEPTION CONSTITUTING
FRAUD, AND LIABILITY
THEREFOR.

32 (Mich.) A tenant has a right to remove
trade fixtures only while still in possession under
his lease, unless the time for doing so has been
extended.-Waverly Park Amusement Co. V.
Michigan United Traction Co., 163 N. W. 917.
33 (Mich.) If the tenant puts up trade fix-9 (Neb.) Representations by party to con-
tures under his first lease, and re-leases, making existence of certain facts, or which the party
tract in terms leading other party to suppose
his occupancy continuous, he need not remove making them knows to have led other party to
them until his tenancy ends.-Waverly Park suppose their existence, if made designedly and
Amusement Co. v. Michigan United Traction fraudulently, are fraudulent representations.-
Co., 163 N. W. 917.
Hlavaty v. Blair, 163 N. W. 330.
35(21⁄2) (Mich.) In amusement park ten-11(1) (Iowa) Representations of owner in
ant's action for damages by removal of trade leasing farm that it was free from noxious weeds
fixtures held proper to consider reduction of is not trade talk, or puffing or merely expres-
profits of roller coaster and skating rink due to sion of opinion, but, if false, actionable.-Franke
destruction of surrounding devices.-Waverly
Park Amusement Co. v. Michigan United Trac-11(2) (Iowa) Statements of value or of qual-
v. Kelsheimer, 163 N. W. 239.
35(3) (Mich.) In tenant's action for dam-ity made by owner in leasing a farm, if made
ages by the landlord's removal of trade fixtures, fact, and if so accepted are to be treated as rep-
with the purpose of having them accepted as of
all items of property, title to which was not
shown to have been in the tenant, should be resentations of fact, as regards right of action
removed from consideration of the jury.-Way- for fraud.-Franke v. Kelsheimer, 163 N. W.
verly Park Amusement Co. v. Michigan United
Traction Co., 163 N. W. 919.

tion Co., 163 N. W. 919.

239.

11(2) (Minn.) Statements of opinion as to
value do not ordinarily constitute actionable
fraud.-Vath v. Wiechmann, 163 N. W. 1028.

35(4) (Mich.) In tenant's action for land-
lord's injuries to trade fixtures, where tenant
had previously secured injunction restraining
interference therewith landlord held entitled to
instruction that if it had interfered with the
property after the issuance of the injunction it
would have been in contempt of court.-Waverly
Park Amusement Co. v. Michigan United Trac-22(1) (Iowa) Fraudulent representations as
tion Co., 163 N. W. 919.

9 (S.D.) Under Pen. Code, § 582, as amend-
ed by Laws 1915, c. 194, § 1, held, that sign-
ing of a fictitious name to a check with fraud-
ulent intent constitutes forgery.-State v. Lar-
son, 163 N. W. 566.

44(2) (S.D.) In prosecution for forgery in
the third degree under Pen. Code, § 582, as
amended by Laws 1915, c. 194, evidence held
to sustain a verdict of guilty.-State v. Larson,
163 N. W. 566.

See Incest.

FORNICATION.

20 (N.D.) One fraudulently inducing a con-
tract is precluded from asserting the innocent
party's negligence in relying upon the fraudu-
lent representations.-Elliott Supply Co. v. Lish,
163 N. W. 271.

to quality of land, made by owner when leasing
it, could be relied on by lessee, the land being
at a distance, and as lessor told lessee, it being
no use to visit it because it was covered with
snow. Franke v. Kelsheimer, 163 N. W. 239.

II. ACTIONS.

(A) Rights of Action and Defenses.
31 (Iowa) One induced by fraudulent repre
sentations to take a lease may rescind or, hav-
ing changed his position before ascertaining
truth, may sue for damages.-Franke v. Kel-
sheimer, 163 N. W. 239.

32 (Minn.) Where a purchaser has partly
performed the contract before discovering the
vendor's fraud, he may affirm it and bring his
action for deceit.-Humphrey v. Sievers, 163
N. W. 737.

35 (Mich.) Delay of plaintiff in electing to
disaffirm alleged fraudulent transaction and his
retention and control of property received there-
under, held to bar his recovery.-Damm v. Vin-
cent, 163 N. W. 877.

35 (Minn.) One induced by false representa-
tions to enter into a contract, and who, after
discovering the fraud, ratifies the executory con-
tract, waives the fraud.-Humphrey v. Sievers,
163 N. W. 737.

Where a purchaser enters into an agreement
modifying the prior contract after discovering
the vendor's fraud, the agreement waives his
right to bring an action for deceit.-Id.

Where a purchaser affirms the contract of
sale, his transfer of his interest in the land
does not waive his action against the vendor for
deceit inducing the contract.—Id.

(C) Evidence.

58(1) (Minn.) Plaintiff's evidence, in an ac-
tion for degeit in the exchange of lands held not
to show actionable fraud.-Bullock v. Ferch, 163
N. W. 159.

(D) Damages.

FRAUDULENT CONVEYANCES.
See Constitutional Law, 208.

I. TRANSFERS AND TRANSACTIONS
INVALID.

59(1) (Minn.) Plaintiff's evidence, in an ac-
tion for deceit in the exchange of lands, held not
to show a legal measure of the loss, if any, sus-
tained by him.-Bullock v. Ferch, 163 N. W. 159.
59(2) (Iowa) Difference between what was
the rental value of the farm and what would
have been its rental value had it been as repre- 47 (S.D.) The Bulk Sales Law held a prop-
sented by lessor is a proper measure of damages er exercise of the police power.-William Tacka-
in action by lessee for fraud inducing the tak- berry Co. v. German State Bank, 163 N. W.
ing of the lease.-Franke v. Kelsheimer, 163 N. 709.
W. 239.

59(3) (Minn.) The measure of damages for
fraud inducing a sale of land is the difference
between the price and its market value, unaf-
fected by the price for which the purchaser sold
his interest in the land.-Humphrey v. Sievers,
163 N. W. 737.

(C) Property and Rights Transferred.

(E) Consideration.

79 (Neb.) When there is "no mutual fraud-
ulent intent," any person, solvent or insolvent,
may dispose of his property for a valuable con-
sideration, which may be future services_agreed
upon between parties.-Vanderlip v. Barnes,
163 N. W. 856.

62 (Neb.) In an action for fraud inducing 81 (S.D.) Where chattel mortgage secured
plaintiff's purchase of all of the stock of an oil note for $2,000, a second mortgage covering
company, verdict for plaintiff in a certain same property given without additional con-
amount held not responsive to the evidence.- sideration pursuant to agreement that after a
King v. Day, 163 N. W. 150.
sale of property mortgagee would advance
mortgagor $500 was a fraud against the mort-
gagor's creditors to the extent of $500.-Nelson
v. Badker, 163 N. W. 569.

(E) Trial, Judgment, and Review.
64(1) (Minn.) On evidence in an action for
deceit brought by the purchaser of a farm, held,
that the question as to whether he had been
deceived was for the jury.-Humphrey v. Siev-
ers, 163 N. W. 737.

Whether a purchaser's modifications of the
original contract of sale were made before he
had knowledge of the vendor's deceit held a
question for the jury.-Id.

III. CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY.

69 (Neb.) In prosecution for unlawfully and
feloniously receiving property with felonious in-
tent to defraud owner of his property, evidence
held insufficient to sustain a conviction.-Hodge
v. State, 163 N. W. 321.

FRAUDS, STATUTE OF.

VIII. REQUISITES AND SUFFICIENCY
OF WRITING.

115(4) (Wis.) The signature of vendor to a
contract for sale of land was sufficient to give
it validity if purchaser accepted and adopted it.
-Heins v. Thompson & Flieth Lumber Co., 163
N. W. 173.

116(1, 2) (Wis.) By the direct provisions of
St. 1915, § 2302, contracts for sale of land held
sufficiently signed on part of vendor by his
agent.-Heins v. Thompson & Flieth Lumber
Co., 163 N. W. 173.

96(2) (Mich.) A conveyance will not be set
aside as fraudulent where debtor held title to
secure a debt from his son to his wife for money
advanced son to enable him to buy property, and
son had during all that time been in possession
of it under claim of ownership, had paid his
debt, and held record title when plaintiffs' execu-
tions were levied.-Atkinson v. Akin, 163 N. W.
1024.

(D) Bona Fide Purchasers from Grantee.

199 (S.D.) Under Bulk Sales Law, provid-
ing that consideration received on sale or ex-
change of merchandise in bulk shall be held in
trust for creditors of vendor, a creditor who re-
ceives land exchanged for stock of merchandise
as security for then existing debt knowing that
it was so given holds land subject to rights of
unpaid creditors, whether he knew of existence
of such creditors or not.-William Tackaberry
Co. v. German State Bank, 163 N. W. 709.

118(3) (Wis.) If all correspondence between
parties concerning purchase of land clearly show
a contract, statute of frauds is satisfied.-Heins
v. Thompson & Flieth Lumber Co., 163 N. W.200 (S.D.) Under Bulk Sales Law, provid-
173.

IX. OPERATION AND EFFECT OF
STATUTE.

125(1) (Mich.) A contract definitely fixing
the property, the parties, the price, and the
terms of payment complies with the require-
ments of the statute of frauds.-Ogooshevitz v.
Arnold, 163 N. W. 946.

129(9) (Mich.) Oral contract for purchase
of real estate is enforceable, where possession is
taken of premises and improvements are made.
-Atkinson v. Akin, 163 N. W. 1024.

X. PLEADING, EVIDENCE, TRIAL,
AND REVIEW.

ing that consideration received on sale or ex-
change of merchandise in bulk should be held
in trust for creditors of vendor, creditor who re-
ceives land exchanged for stock of merchandise.
as security for then existing debt under belief
that other creditors have been paid holds land
in trust for benefit of other creditors.-William
Tackaberry Co. v. German State Bank, 163 N.
W. 709.

III. REMEDIES OF CREDITORS AND
PURCHASERS.

(B) Remedies on Ground of Nullity of
Transfer.

226 (S.D.) In pursuing his remedy under
statutes, creditor is entitled to resort to prop-
erty fraudulently transferred the same as if
transfer had not been made.-Louder v. Hun-
ter, 163 N. W. 686.

158(1) (Mich.) Purchaser of goods, relying
on original order void under statute of frauds,
held to have burden of showing that deliveries
of parts of the same kind of goods were made
pursuant to the order.-Armour & Co. v. Free-269(1) (Mich.) In action to set aside convey-
man Baking Co., 163 N. W. 896.
ance as fraudulent, where defendants claim that

(F) Pleading.

ENFORCE.

creditors are chargeable with notice of their | VI. PROCEEDINGS TO SUPPORT OR
rights because defendants were in possession,
and answer alleges only that they were owners
and made improvements thereon, matter of pos-
session is before court, where plaintiffs claim
no surprise.-Atkinson v. Akin, 163 N. W. 1024.

(G) Evidence.

178 (Mich.) Though the garnishee was or-
dered to appear before "the circuit judge at his
office," the affidavit for default is sufficient,
though stating he failed to appear before said
"court" as required by said order.-Nichol v.
Nevers, 163 N. W. 65.

There being no appearance of garnishee in
the proceeding following his disclosure, notice
need not be given him of default for failure to
appear for examination, or assessment of dam-

ages.-Id.

274 (S.D.) In action upon accounts in
which intervener claimed funds garnished as
proceeds of sale of personal property mort-
gaged by defendant to intervener, burden was on
plaintiff to show that mortgage was made with
intent on part of intervener to defraud defend-
ant's creditors as alleged.-Nelson v. Badker, 187 (Mich.) The default judgment against a
163 N. W. 569.
garnishee being good, motion to set it aside,
treated as one for new trial, or in arrest of
merits.-Nichol v. Nevers, 163 N. W. 65.
judgment, should be accompanied by affidavit of

298(4) (S.D.) Evidence held insufficient to
sustain finding that mortgage was made with
intent on part of intervener mortgagee to de-
fraud creditors of defendant mortgagor.-Nel-
son v. Badker, 163 N. W. 569.

Motion to set aside a good default judgment
against a garnishee, treated as one for new trial,
or in arrest of judgment, is addressed to the
trial court's sound judicial discretion.-Id.

GESTATION.

(J) Judgment or Decree and Execution.
312(3) (S.D.) In suit to subject funds de-
rived from sale of lots to payment of judgment
debt against deceased, held, that plaintiff, hav- See Bastards, 71; Criminal Law, 304.
ing secured decree setting aside conveyance of
one heir and realized value of his interest, gran-
tee, who had also purchased remaining interest

GIFTS.

I. INTER VIVOS.

from other heirs, and conveyed same to innocent See Wills, 758.
purchasers so that same could not be subjected
to further execution on the judgment, was not
liable for value of lots so sold.-Louder v. Hun-49(4) (Minn.) In action by executrix, a
ter, 163 N. W. 686.

Court of equity should not undertake to pe
nalize fraudulent grantee by subjecting property
not secured through conveyance to payment of
indebtedness.-Id.

daughter of testator, to recover land claimed to
be a part of an estate, evidence held sufficient
to justify finding of executed parol gift of the
land to defendant, a son.-Drager v. Seegert,
163 N. W. 756.

GONORRHEAL INFECTION.

313(1) (S.D.) Under Civ. Code, § 2370, only
relief to which judgment creditor is entitled is
cancellation of transfer so far as it obstructs
enforcement of his judgment.-Louder v. Hunter, See Master and Servant, ~376.
163 N. W. 686.

GOOD FAITH.

See Bills and Notes, 327-358, 525; Libel
and Slander, 50; Specific Performance,
94; Vendor and Purchaser, 227–244.

GRAND JURY.

See Indictment and Information, 140; Li-
bel and Slander, 48, 50, 112.

2 (Mich.) The Constitution does not pro-
hibit Legislature from limiting jurisdiction and
regulating practice of recorder's court of De-
troit so that it has no power to order summon-
ing of grand jury.-Jasnowski v. Connolly, 163
N. W. 910.

7 (Mich.) Under Pub. Acts 1893, No. 204, §
22, Comp. Laws 1897, § 11934, and Detroit
Charter 1904, pars. 290-292, only statutory
methods whereby one may be prosecuted in re-

See Constitutional Law, 278; Eminent Do- corder's court of Detroit are on indictment re-
main,

2.

GARNISHMENT.

See Attachment.

III. PROCEEDINGS TO PROCURE.
77 (Mich.) In view of Comp. Laws, § 10636,
à circuit court is not deprived of jurisdiction of
garnishment proceedings because of garnishee be-
ing a resident of another county.-Nichol v. Nev-
ers, 163 N. W. 65.

turned by grand jury sitting in county circuit
court or on information signed by county prose-
cuting attorney. Jasnowski v. Connolly, 163
N. W. 910.

There never has been vested in recorder's
court of Detroit any authority to order summon-
ing of a grand jury.-Id.

The recorder's court of Detroit cannot sum-
mon grand jury to inquire into crimes oc-
curring in the city, since under Comp. Laws
1897, § 11876, etc., no grand jury can be con-
vened which has not power to inquire for the
whole county.—Id.

84 (Mich.) Though affidavit for garnishment
does not, as it should, where garnishee is a resi-26 (Iowa) Under Acts 20th Gen. Assem, c.
dent of another county, disclose such fact, to
show why writ is directed to sheriff of another
county, judgment against garnishee is sustained
by his disclosure and submitting himself to
court's jurisdiction.-Nichol v. Nevers, 163 N.
W. 65.

198, Acts 21st Gen. Assem. c. 134, and Acts 22d
Gen, Assem. c. 37 dividing Pottawattamie coun-
ty for judicial purposes, and specifying juris-
diction of district court at Council Bluffs and
Avoca, and by section 5 of the Act of the 21st
Gen. Assem., a grand jury impaneled at Council

GUARANTY.

See Principal and Surety.

GUARDIAN AND WARD.

III. CUSTODY AND CARE OF WARD'S
PERSON AND ESTATE.

HEIRS.

See Descent and Distribution.

HIGHWAYS.

See Bridges; Eminent Domain, 83; Rail-
roads, 97-113, 324-350; Towns, 61.

I. ESTABLISHMENT, ALTERATION,
AND DISCONTÍNUANCE.

(A) Establishment by Prescription, User,
or Recognition.

17 (Mich.) Evidence held insufficient to es-
tablish title of village and township to highway
by user for period of years.-Village of Grosse
Pointe Shores v. Holmes, 163 N. W. 31.
(B) Establishment by Statute
tory Proceedings.

or Statu-

70 (Iowa) Where one indebted to a minor,
paid his debt to guardian who had not qualified,
and ward after majority received half the money
from the guardian without attempting to collect 21 (N.D.) Laws 1870-71, c. 33, accepting
the remainder from the debtor or the guardian right of way for highways on public lands
until after the guardian went into bankruptcy, granted by Act Cong. July 26, 1866, related
the guardian's receipt of the money was ratified. back to date of grant, and was not revoked by
-Nassen v. Anfenson, 163 N. W. 577.
subsequent use of part of land as Indian res-
ervation, nor by Laws 1897, c. 112, §§ 3, 22,
and Laws 1879, c. 97, § 3.-Faxon v. Lallie
Civil Tp., 163 N. W. 531.

GUESTS.

See Negligence, 93; Railroads, 114.

II. JURISDICTION, PROCEEDINGS,
AND RELIEF.

85(1) (Wis.) In habeas corpus by father to
obtain custody of his infant children, evidence
held sufficiently to show that father was an un-
suitable person to have custody and that custody
ought to be continued in defendant.-State v.
Franz, 163 N. W. 191.

99(1) (Wis.) If father is not a fit person to
have custody of his infant children, court will
award custody to another.-State v. Franz, 163
N. W. 191.

In habeas corpus to obtain custody of infants,
question of religion should be given considera-
tion, and, other things being equal, custody
awarded to those having same faith as the par-
ents of the child.-Id.

109 (Minn.) Where a sentence exceeds the
penalty which the court had power to impose.
it is void as to the excess, but the defendant
cannot be discharged on habeas corpus until he
has performed the part which the court had
power to impose if it is severable from the un-
lawful part.-State v. Reed, 163 N. W. 984, 985.
Where the sentence of an accused is wholly
void, he will on habeas corpus to obtain his dis-
charge be remanded for sentence.-Id.

HABITS.

See Criminal Law, 372.

HARMLESS ERROR.

See Appeal and Error, 1031-1071: Crimi-
nal Law, ~11662-1172; Homicide,
334-339.

HEALTH.

68 (Iowa) Evidence held insufficient to show
that a stone used by a surveyor in laying out a
road as a quarter corner stone was in fact that
originally placed as such stone.-Meyers v.
Wonick, 163 N. W. 203.

68 (N.D.) Where a highway has been for
many years located, graded, and established with
due care and in good faith, it may not be im-
peached without clear and convincing proof of
authority.-Glinski v. Kowalskim, 163 N. W.

1069.

(D) Title to Fee and Rights of Abutting
Owners.

87 (Iowa) Evidence held to show that both
plaintiff's and defendants' fences encroached up-
on the highway so as to require their removal.-
Meyers v. Wonick, 163 N. W. 203.

II. HIGHWAY DISTRICTS AND

OFFICERS.

95(1) (Mich.) Covert Act, as amended, con-
ferring authority and imposing duties on state
highway commissioner in regard to construction
of roads in those counties where a county road
system has not been adopted, does not, in view
of Const. art. 8, § 26, and article 10, § 14, vio-
late constitutional provisions protecting_local
self-government.-Loomis v. Rogers, 163 N. W.

1018.

It is not valid objection to Covert Act, as
amended, that it places greater burdens on town-
ships which have not adopted county road sys-
tem than on those which have, in absence of
showing that any property owner was assessed
in excess of actual resultant benefits.-Id.
III. CONSTRUCTION, IMPROVEMENT,
AND REPAIR.

113(4) (Minn.) In action by subcontractor
for excavation work on state road, evidence held
to warrant finding of gross mistake in engineer's
final estimate as to earth moved and overhaul
sufficient to relieve from contract provision that
such estimate should be binding.-Dawson v.
Northwestern Const. Co., 163 N. W. 772.

In action by subcontractor to recover for ex-
cavation work on state road, evidence held to
justify verdict as to amount of earth moved by
subcontractor and overhaul thereon.-Id.

In action for amount due under subcontract

See Constitutional Law, 278; Municipal for excavation work on state road, memoranda
Corporations, 191.

HEARSAY EVIDENCE.

See Criminal Law, 419, 420; Evidence,
320.

kept by plaintiff's foreman of number of cars
hauled, made in usual course of work, held ad-
missible.-Id.

In action to recover on subcontract for exca-
vation work on state road, testimony of plain-
tiff and his witnesses as to contents of cars