court, and the Appellate Court will only interfere where an abuse of such discretion is shown. -Swygart v. Willard (Ind. Sup.) 755. *An order granting a temporary injunction will not be disturbed on appeal in the absence of a showing of a clear abuse of discretion in the granting of the same.-City of Laporte v. Scott (Ind. Sup.) 878. *An order denying a new trial will only be disturbed on appeal when the evidence is documentary, by deposition, or otherwise of such a clear and conclusive character as to show as a matter of law that the decision is erroneous.Nichols & Shepard Co. v. Berning (Ind. App.) 776. § 21. Questions of fact, verdicts, and findings. *Verdict in condemnation proceedings will not be set aside if within the range of conflicting evidence.-Illinois, I. & M. Ry. Co. v. Ring (Ill.) 83. Where, in a will contest, there is evidence that testatrix was not unduly influenced, as alleged, in executing the will, a verdict in support of the will on such issue will not be disturbed on appeal.-Compher v. Browning (Ill.) 678. A verdict in support of a will, on an issue of undue influence, which has been sustained by the trial court, will not be reversed on error unless clearly against the weight of the evidence. Compher v. Browning (Ill.) 678. Where defendant is awarded no relief on his cross-complaint, rulings as to that pleading cannot be complained of on plaintiff's appeal.-Baum v. Palmer (Ind. Sup.) 108. *The sufficiency of the evidence in a jury case held not to be reviewed on appeal, unless it is presented as a question of law.-American Food Co. v. Halstead (Ind. Sup.) 251. *Where a verdict is fully sustained by the evidence, it will not be disturbed on the ground of insufficient evidence.-Pittsburgh, C., C. & St. L. Ry. Co. v. Nicholas (Ind. Sup.) 522. The verdict of a jury cannot be disturbed on the weight of the evidence.-Swygart v. Willard (Ind. Sup.) 755. The Supreme Court cannot reverse a judgment on the weight of the evidence.-Beery v. Driver (Ind. Sup.) 967. *Where there is evidence in the record sustaining the verdict of the jury, the judgment will not be disturbed on appeal.-Capital Nat. Bank v. Wilkerson (Ind. App.) 258. *A finding sustained by some evidence is conclusive on appeal.-Williams v. Hoffman (Ind. App.) 440. *In an action on a surviving partner's bond as administrator of the deceased partner, a decision which utterly disregards administration proceedings in the probate court is contrary to law. Harrah v. State (Ind. App.) 443. Where there is 'evidence in the record to support each of the several specific findings made by the court, a judgment based thereon will not be reversed as not sustained by sufficient evidence.-Case v. Collins (Ind. App.) 781. *The Appellate Court will not weigh the evidence. New York, C. & St. L. R. Co. v. Robbins (Ind. App.) 804. The decision of the trial court on conflicting evidence will not be disturbed.-Over v. Dehne (Ind. App.) 883. verdict may rest.-Pittsburgh, C., C. & St. L. Ry. Co. v. Simons (Ind. App.) 883. The findings of fact stated in the report of the justice who heard the evidence on a trial made pursuant to Rev. Laws, c. 159, § 23, whether made voluntarily, or on the request of appellant, will not be set aside unless they are plainly wrong. Cohen v. Nagle (Mass.) 276. § 22. Harmless error in general. In an action to recover on a building contract, certain remarks of the court held not prejudicial.-Fitzgerald v. Benner (Ill.) 709. verdict should have been either more or less *One held not entitled to complain that the favorable.-American Food Co. v. Halstead (Ind. Sup.) 251. The giving of inaccurate instructions held harmless; it clearly appearing from the evidence that the verdict was the only one that could have been returned.-Pittsburgh, C., C. & St. L. Ry. Co. v. Higgs (Ind. Sup.) 299. *Where a material error was committed by the trial court, it will be presumed on appeal. in the absence of a clear showing to the contrary, that the judgment was in some degree the product of such error.-Lake Erie & W. R. Co. v. McFall (Ind. Sup.) 400. A judgment for plaintiff not shown to rest entirely on a good paragraph of the complaint. as distinguished from one to which a demurrer was erroneously overruled, cannot stand.-Lake Shore & M. S. Ry. Co. v. Barnes (Ind. Sup.) 629. *The error in giving or refusing instructions held not ground for reversal where the answers to the interrogatories show that the complaining party was not harmed thereby.-Muncie Pulp Co. v. Hacker (Ind. App.) 770. One enjoined from using a name as a tradename held not entitled to complain that the injunction did not give plaintiff full remedy.-Cohen v. Nagle (Mass.) 276. § 23. Harmless error in rulings as to pleading. *A judgment in favor of plaintiff will be reversed for error in overruling a demurrer to a defective paragraph of the complaint, unless the verdict or findings exclusively rest on the good paragraphs.-Lake Erie & W. R. Co. v. McFall (Ind. Sup.) 400. *There is no error in sustaining a demurrer to a paragraph of an answer where all the evidence admissible under it was admissible under the general denial. City of Valparaiso v. Spaeth (Ind. Sup.) 514. *Withdrawal of a paragraph of the answer after the overruling of a demurrer thereto held to render such ruling without prejudice to plaintiff.-Starkey v. Starkey (Ind. Sup.) 876. In a suit to enforce a mechanic's lien, the sustaining of a demurrer to a paragraph of the reply, denying a consideration for a bond alleged in the answer, held not an available error. Miller v. Taggart (Ind. App.) 321. The Appellate Court, in order to determine whether the sustaining of a demurrer to a paragraph of the answer was injurious, will limit tending to support such paragraph was admissi its inquiry to the question whether evidence ble under other paragraphs.-McAfee v. Bending (Ind. App.) 412. of a demurrer to the answer by a husband jointPlaintiff held not harmed by the overruling ly sued with his wife in an action on the note, for want of facts sufficient to constitute a defense as to him.-Equitable Trust Co. v. Torphy (Ind. App.) 639. Point annotated. See syllabus. *Denial of a motion for a new trial for insufficiency of the evidence will be sustained where there is any competent evidence on which the In an action on a note against husband and wife, plaintiff, having recovered judgment for a part of his demand against the wife, held not entitled to object on appeal that under the wife's answer there could be no partial recovery. Equitable Trust Co. v. Torphy (Ind. App.) 639. *The sustaining of a demurrer to a paragraph of an answer is harmless error where the facts alleged therein are provable under the general denial. Shetterly v. Axt (Ind. App.) 901. Error in sustaining a demurrer to a paragraph of the complaint cannot be regarded as harmless on the ground that the same questions are presented by exceptions to the conclusions of law.-Warner v. Jennings (Ind. App.) 1013. $24. Harmless error in rulings as to evidence. Evidence of a matter of which the court takes judicial notice is harmless.-Wabash R. Co. v. Campbell (Ill.) 346. *Refusal to strike out answer held harmless error, where there is competent evidence to the same effect.-Chicago & J. Electric Ry. Co. v. Patton (Ill.) 381. Where an action is tried to the court without a jury permitting a witness to testify to a conclusion, held not prejudicial error.-Illinois Steel Co. v. Preble Mach. Works Co. (Ill.) 574. In an action to recover a balance due on a building contract, the admission of certain evidence, even though constituting a conclusion of the witness, held harmless.-Fitzgerald v. Benner (Ill.) 709. In an action for the price of certain jewelry sold the admission in evidence of a receipt and certificate relating to jewelry purchased by plaintiff held without prejudice.-Brown v. White (Ill.) 833. *There was no reversible error committed by admitting evidence out of its logical order. Pittsburgh, C., C. & St. L. Ry. Co. v. Nicholas (Ind. Sup.) 522. On the issue of mental capacity of a testator, the action of the court in permitting certain expressions used by witnesses to stand held not prejudicial error.-Swygart v. Willard (Ind. Sup.) 755. *On the issue of mental capacity of a testator, the refusal to strike out an answer of a medical expert witness to a preliminary question held harmless.-Swygart v. Willard (Ind. Sup.) 755. On the issue of mental capacity of a testator, the admission of certain testimony of a nonexpert witness held harmless error.-Swygart v. Willard (Ind. Sup.) 755. The erroneous exclusion of evidence in no wise prejudicial to the rights of a party is not reversible error.-Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. v. Willis (Ind. App.) 560. In an action for personal injuries, where the defendant's liability was admitted, and no question as to the recovery was presented on appeal, any error in rulings on evidence would not justify a reversal.-Indianapolis & M. Rapid Transit Co. v. Reeder (Ind. App.) 816. In an action for injuries to a child while crossing defendant's railroad track, defendant held not prejudiced by evidence that he could have crossed in safety if he had not caught his foot in a switch.-Pittsburgh, C., C. & St. L. Ry. Co. v. Simons (Ind. App.) 883. -Roberts v. Terre Haute Electric Co. (Ind. App.) 895. On an issue of fraud in a sale of certain goods, the exclusion of the records of judgments obtained by two of the seller's creditors held harmless.-Hart v. Brierley (Mass.) 286. § 25. Harmless error in instructions to jury. The use of the word "defendant" in place of "plaintiff" in an instruction held harmless in view of other instructions.-National Enameling & Stamping Co. v. McCorkle (Ill.) 843. Where the jury by answer to special interrogatories found against plaintiff on her reply of estoppel, failure to refer to that issue in certain instructions was harmless.-Baum v. Palmer (Ind. Sup.) 108. Where there is no evidence of contributory negligence, defendant cannot complain of erroneous instructions relative to contributory negligence. -Pittsburgh, C., C. & St. L. Ry. Co. v. Higgs (Ind. Sup.) 299. In an action by a servant for injury, held that an instruction that defendant had the burden of showing assumption of risk, if erroneous, was harmless.-Pittsburgh, C., C. & St. L. Ry. Co. v. Nicholas (Ind. Sup.) 522. An instruction in an action for injuries received by an operator of an emery wheel held not prejudicial to the master.-Muncie Pulp Co. v. Hacker (Ind. App.) 770. That appellee was the only witness having pecuniary interest in result of suit held not to render harmless instruction relating to credibility of witness interested in result of suit.Muncie, H. & Ft. W. Ry. Co. v. Ladd (Ind. App.) 790. Refusal to give a charge in an action on a policy insuring a building against loss by fire and lightning held not prejudicial in view of the findings.-Home Ins. Co. v. Gagen (Ind. App.) 927. An assignment of error not argued on appeal is waived.-Western Union Telegraph Co. v. State (Ind. Sup.) 100. *Assignments of error, not presented in any manner, supported or discussed in appellant's brief, will be treated as waived.-Starkey v. Starkey (Ind. Sup.) 876. *A party waives causes assigned in his motion for a new trial by failing to refer thereto in his brief on appeal.-Capital Nat. Bank v. Wilkerson (Ind. App.) 258. *Failure to discuss on appeal a question presented as to the sufficiency of a pleading operates as a waiver of the objection.-Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. v. Willis (Ind. App.) 560. *Ground for a new trial not argued on appeal held waived.-Indianapolis & M. Rapid Transit Co. v. Reeder (Ind. App.) 816. Where an exception is not argued on appeal, it will be considered waived.-American Woolen Co. v. Boston & M. R. Co. (Mass.) 658. § 27. Decisions of intermediate courts. A finding by the trial court and the Appellate Court on a question of fact is conclusive upon the Supreme Court, if based on competent evidence.-Illinois Steel Co. v. Preble Mach. Works Co. (Ill.) 574. In the absence of evidence of defendant's negligence, the exclusion of evidence illustrating A determination of the Appellate Court that the care exercised by plaintiff would not au- the finding of the superior court is not against thorize the reversal of a judgment for defendant. the weight of the evidence, cannot be reviewed * Point annotated. See syllabus. by the Supreme Court.-Brown v. White (Ill.) | ed by it by the appellate court, held to have *Court of Appeals will not review exceptions Error in the overruling of a demurrer for mis- Const. art. 6, § 9, does not prevent the Court to obtain a ruling at special term on additional A decision on a prior appeal that the com- § 28. Subsequent appeals. *Decision on appeal held the law of the case Court of Appeals held to have power to correct § 30. Liabilities on bonds and under- A question whether plaintiff has established A statement in an opinion of the Supreme where the statement is erroneous and contra- *Where, on a second trial, additional testi § 29. Determination and disposition of Where the Appellate Court differs from the Judgment of appellate court held final in Orders reinstating a cause after remand do Recitals of order of county court reinstating *Where the Supreme Court finally disposes Under the injunction act (2 Starr & C. Ann. 1903, c. 32, §§ 67b-67d, held insufficient.-Me- In an action against the surety on an appeal APPEARANCE. In condemnation proceedings, see "Eminent Do- APPLIANCES. Liability of employer for defects, see "Master APPLICATION. For insurance, see "Insurance," § 2. APPOINTMENT. Of municipal officers, see "Municipal Corpora- APPORTIONMENT. Of assessments for public improvements, see APPRENTICES. Assumption by, of risks incident to employment, APPROPRIATION. For payment of municipal debts, see "Municipal * Point annotated. See syllabus. Illegal arrest, see "False Imprisonment." § 1. On criminal charges. Under Hurd's Rev. St. 1903, c. 38, § 342, a ASSAULT AND BATTERY. Conspiracy to commit assault, see "Conspiracy," Liability of master for assault by servant on § 1. Civil liability. Evidence held to show in an action for as- ASSESSMENT. Of benefits and damages from construction of Of compensation for property taken for public Of expenses of public improvements, see "Drains," Of tax, see "Taxation," § 3. ASSETS. Of partnership, see "Partnership," §§ 1, 2. ASSIGNMENT OF ERRORS. See "Appeal and Error." § 12; "Criminal Law," In bastardy proceedings, see "Bastards," § 1. Waiver in appellate court, see "Appeal and Er- ASSIGNMENTS. Transfers of particular species of property, See "Bills and Notes," § 3; "Insurance," § 3. § 1. Rights and liabilities of parties. ditch held not entitled to set up an agreement Where plaintiff assigns his claim and has no Continuance of action after assignment pend- Assignor held not entitled to recover in his (N. Y.) 338. ASSIGNMENTS FOR BENEFIT OF See "Bankruptcy." ASSOCIATIONS. See "Beneficial Associations"; "Building and Inadequacy of legal remedy as affecting jurisdic- Pleading in suit to compel reinstatement of *A court has jurisdiction in equity to compel ASSUMPTION. As to facts in charge to jury, see "Trial," § 5. Of risk by employé, see "Master and Servant," ATTACHMENT. See "Execution"; "Garnishment." As excuse for failure of delivery by warehouse- § 1. Levy, lien, and custody and dis- An attachment issued by a federal circuit Fraud as to creditors, see "Fraudulent Con- Ingraham (N. Y.) 476. In bankruptcy, see "Bankruptcy," § 1. ATTESTATION. Of will, see "Wills," 8. * Point annotated. See syllabus. ATTORNEY AND CLIENT. bankrupt to recover personal property under an rupt immediately prior to and continuously up Argument and conduct of counsel at trial in Competency of attorney as witness, see "Wit- Expert testimony as to value of attorney's Liability of infant for services of attorney, see AUTHORITY. Of agent, see "Principal and Agent," §§ 1, 2. AUTOMOBILES. Use of highway, see "Highways," § 4; AVOIDANCE. Under Nat. Bankr. Act July 1, 1898, c. 541, Under Nat. Bankr. Act July 1, 1898, c. 541, Pleading matter in avoidance, see "Pleading," AWARD. See "Arbitration and Award," § 2. BAILMENT. See "Carriers," § 2; "Warehousemen." The buyer of a windmill, having elected to BALLOTS. See "Elections," § 1. BANKRUPTCY. see Fraudulent preference by bankrupt as ground Liabilities of sureties on poor debtor's bond as Right to jury trial in proceedings to set aside § 1. Assignment, administration, and A conditional sale of goods authorizing the 325. Certain property held within Bankr. Act, U. In a suit by a trustee in bankruptcy to In a suit by a trustee in bankruptcy to recover In a suit by a trustee in bankruptcy to recover 2. Rights, remedies, and discharge of bankrupt. Under Bankr. Act. July 1, 1898, c. 541, § 17, Under Bankr. Act, July 1, 1898. c. 541, § 63, Under Nat. Bankr. Act July 1, 1898, c. 541, |