dinance of the city thereby binds itself to com- ply with the requirements of the ordinance.- Cincinnati, L. & A. Electric St. R. Co. v. Stahle (Ind. App.) 551.
Rev. St. 1903, § 1536-185, held to confer on property owner the privilege of withholding his "Joint consent to grant of street railroad franchise, but not to grant him the privilege of limiting his con- sent to a particular corporation or individual. -Forest City Ry. Co. v. Day (Ohio) 396.
Of corporations, see "Corporations," § 3. Of unincorporated associations, see "Joint Stock Companies."
STOLEN GOODS.
See "Receiving Stolen Goods."
STREET RAILROADS.
Admissions as evidence in action for injuries caused by operation of, see "Evidence," § 5. Carriage of passengers, see "Carriers." Contributory negligence in general of person injured by operation of, see "Negligence," §§ 2, 4.
Evidence of res gestæ in action for injuries caused by operation of, see "Evidence," § 3. § 1. Establishment, construction, and maintenance.
§ 2. Regulation and operation.
Burns' Ann. St. 1901, § 5468a, subd. 6a, ex- tending the powers of interurban street rail- roads, held not objectionable as extending rights of such railways over the streets of a city with- out its consent.-Roberts v. Terre Haute Elec- tric Co. (Ind. App.) 323.
The right of a street railway company to run freight cars over its lines cannot be collaterally attacked in an action for personal injuries caused by the operation of such cars.-Roberts v. Terre Haute Electric Co. (Ind. App.) 323.
Plaintiff in an action for injuries to his ward by street car held not entitled to prove that the latter was of weak mind, as a part of his main case, where such fact had not been pleaded, but could show it in rebuttal.-Roberts v. Terre Haute Electric Co. (Ind. App.) 323.
Complaint against street railway for injuries caused by collision with a team held to suffi- ciently charge negligence.-Cincinnati, L. & A. Electric St. R. Co. v. Stahle (Ind. App.) 551.
A city ordinance restricting the speed of hour, and over crossings to four miles an hour, street cars between crossings to six miles an is not unreasonable.-Cincinnati, L. & A. Elec- tric St. R. Co. v. Stahle (Ind. App.) 551.
A city ordinance limiting the speed of electric A street railroad company which uses and oc- cars will not be interfered with by the courts cupies the streets of a city by virtue of an or-except for good cause shown.-Cincinnati, L.
Point annotated. See syllabus.
& A. Electric St. R. Co. v. Stahle (Ind. App.) 551.
In an action against a street railway for injuries caused by a collision, the question of contributory negligence is primarily one for the jury, to be determined from the facts of the par- ticular case.-Cincinnati, L. & A. Electric St. R. Co. v. Stahle (Ind. App.) 551.
Mandamus to compel enforcement of Sunday laws, see "Mandamus," § 2.
SUPREME COURTS.
In an action against a street railway for in- juries caused by collision, instructions on a question of negligence which was not charged against defendant were properly refused. Cin- See "Principal and Surety." cinnati, L. & A. Electric St. R. Co. v. Stahle (Ind. App.) 551.
*In an action for injuries to plaintiff by being struck by a freight car operated by a street railway, evidence held to require sub- mission of defendant's negligence to the jury. -Roberts v. Terre Haute Electric Co. (Ind. App.) 895.
Ground for continuance, see "Continuance."
SURVIVING PARTNERS.
See "Partnership," § 3.
SURVIVORSHIP.
In an action against a street railway company for injuries sustained in a collision with a street car, the question of the negligence of the motorman held for the jury.-Logan v. Old Colony St. Ry. Co. (Mass.) 510; White v. Same, of devisees or legatees, see "Wills," § 5.
*It is not negligence as a matter of law to drive a team so near a street car track that a car going in the same direction will collide with it.-Logan v. Old Colony St. Ry. Co. (Mass.) 510; White v. Same, Id.
In an action against a street railroad com- pany for injuries to plaintiff's horse, which it was alleged was frightened by one of defend- ant's cars, evidence held to justify submission to the jury of the question of plaintiff's con- tributory negligence. Joyce v. Exeter, H. & A. St. Ry. Co. (Mass.) 1054.
In an action against a street railroad com- pany for injuries to plaintiff's horse, which it was alleged was frightened by one of defend- ant's cars, evidence held to justify submission to the jury of the question of defendant's negli- gence. Joyce v. Exeter, H. & A. St. Ry. Co. (Mass.) 1054.
See "Highways"; "Municipal Corporations," §§ 5-9, 11, 12.
1. Constitutional requirements and restrictions.
If a transient merchant has paid taxes on his goods in one county, he is excused from payment of further taxes for that year in au- as-other county on substantially the same stock.- Simoyan v. Rohan (Ind. App.) 176.
Where an intermediate grantor who had sumed a mortgage on the land conveyed the same to a grantee who also assumed the mortgage, such grantor on paying a foreclosure decree, was subrogated to the rights of the holder thereof.- Oglebay v. Todd (Ind. Sup.) 238.
An administrator who pays for funeral ex- penses and obtains a judgment on such claims against the surviving husband of his intestate, acquires no greater right than the original creditors to reach exempt property of the hus- band.-Weaver v. Gray (Ind. App.) 795.
St. 1904, p. 376, c. 403, § 1, imposing an ex- cise tax on the business of selling, giving, or delivering trading stamps, etc., in connection with the sale of articles, held invalid under Const. art. 4.-O'Keeffe v. City of Somerville (Mass.) 457.
§ 2. Liability of persons and property. Under Rev. Laws, c. 14, §§ 44-46, and chap- ter 111, § 1 (Stat. 1872, p. 279, c. 342), a rail- way company held liable to a tax upon its earn- ings.-McDonald v. Union Freight R. Co. (Mass.) 655.
*Under Laws 1896, p. 797, c. 908; § 4, and New York City Charter (Laws 1901, p. 214. c. 466, § 480), constructions placed upon land
• Point annotated. See syllabus.
belonging to the city of New York situated the transfer tax determined.-In re Palmer's outside of the city limits, in connection with Estate (N. Y.) 16.
the waterworks system, are assessable for tax- ation. In re City of New York (N. Y.) 18.
*Foreign corporation held, under the evi-
dence, doing business in the state, and liable See "Schools and School Districts." § 1. to taxation under Laws 1896, p. 800, c. 908, § 7.-People v. Wells (N. Y.) 24.
§ 3. Levy and assessment.
The value of the stock of a transient mer- chant for the purpose of an assessment under Burns' Ann. St. 1901, § 8441, providing for the assessment of the stock of such a merchant, is to be determined at the time and place the owner temporarily locates and offers the stock for sale.-Simoyan v. Rohan (Ind. App.) 176.
Where the vendee of coal underlying land desires to have that part of the premises trans- ferred by the county auditor into his name on the tax list, under Rev. St. 1906, § 1025, he must present the county auditor evidence of title and satisfactory proof of the value of such coal. Dye v. State (Ohio) 829.
A petition for mandamus to compel the county auditor to transfer a part of lands, under Rev. St. 1906, § 1025, on the tax list, to the name of the purchaser, which fails to allege that compe- tent evidence was offered of the value of such part. held fatally defective.-Dye v. State (Ohio) 829.
In mandamus against county auditor to com- pel him, under Rev. St. 1906, § 1025, to transfer certain real estate on the tax list to the name of the relator, the existence of all the material facts necessary to put the auditor in default must be pleaded and proved.-Dye v. State (Ohio) 829.
§ 4. Payment and refunding or recov- ery of tax paid.
A complaint to restrain the collection of taxes on an increased assessment, and to recover taxes paid under protest, failing to allege that the in- creased assessment was unjust, inequitable, or in excess of the actual value of the property, held fatally defective.-People's Gas, Electric & Heating Co. v. Harrell (Ind. App.) 318.
In an action to recover taxes paid on an al- leged excessive valuation, it would be presumed, in the absence of an allegation to the contrary, that the notice required by Burns' Ann. St. 1901, § 8532, to be published by the board of re- view contained plaintiff's name as one of those whose assessment was intended to be reviewed. -People's Gas, Electric & Heating Co. v. Har- rell (Ind. App.) 318.
Tender in proceeding to set aside quitclaim deed held sufficient to charge certain defendant with payment of a part of the master's charges. -Glos v. Garrett (Ill.) 373.
*Complainant in suit to set aside tax deed held not entitled to costs where he fails to tender the amount paid at the tax sale, with subsequent taxes, costs, and interest, and to keep such ten- der good by bringing the money into court. -Glos v. Garrett (Ill.) 373.
§ 6. Legacy, inheritance, and transfer
TELEGRAPHS AND TELEPHONES.
Mandamus to telegraph company, see "Man- damus," § 3.
§ 1. Establishment, construction, and maintenance.
In an action by a telephone company against a city, asking that the court direct in what manner plaintiff may construct its line along the streets, the company must prove its incor- poration and the election of directors, and on a plea of general issue the burden is on the to establish such claim.--Queen company City Telephone Co. v. City of Cincinnati (Ohio)
A petition by a telephone company against the city to determine the manner in which plaintiff may construct its line held not to jus- tify any order or judgment in its favor.- Queen City Telephone Co. v. City of Cincin- nati (Ohio) 392.
Under Acts 1891, p. 296 (Bates' Ann. St. § 3471-1), authorizing telephone companies to maintain wires under ground, the probate court has no power to grant a telephone com- pany the right in the absence of the consent of the municipal authorities.-Queen City Tele- phone Co. v. City of Cincinnati (Ohio) 392.
2. Regulation and operation. Quotations of a board and the method of supplying them held impressed with a public in- terest, so that the same must be supplied on equal terms to those desiring them.-Western Union Telegraph Co. v. State (Ind. Sup.) 100.
Mandamus does not lie to compel a telegraph company to deliver the quotations of a board of trade to one who refuses to agree not to use them for the purpose of running a bucket shop. -Western Union Telegraph Co. v. State (Ind. Sup.) 100.
while suffering from typhoid fever held not the The rupture of an intestine by plaintiff probable consequence of a delay in delivering a telegram calling for a nurse, so as to entitle plaintiff to recover for such injury.-Kagy v. Western Union Telegraph Co. (Ind. App.) 792.
In an action for delay in delivery of a tele- gram, plaintiff held not entitled to recover for a and suffering occasioned by defendant's negli- physical injury resulting from mental anxiety gence.-Kagy v. Western Union Telegraph Co. (Ind. App.) 792.
TENANCY IN COMMON.
Devise of land held in common, see "Wills," § 1. § 1. Mutual rights, duties, and liabili- ties of co-tenants.
*Exclusion of co-tenants by tenant in pos- session held properly shown by acts construct- ively amounting to denial of their right to pos- session.-McCrum v. McCrum (Ind. App.) 415.
Where tenant in common negligently allowed stock to eat up crops, co-tenants held entitled to the fair value of such crops if they had not been destroyed.-McCrum v. McCrum (Ind. App.) 415.
*Tenant in possession held not bound to ac- *Basis for taxation of stock of domestic cor- count to co-tenants for use and occupation in poration held by nonresident decedent under | absence of agreement or demand by them for
* Point annotated. See syllabus.
THEATERS AND SHOWS.
Invalidating tickets purchased on sidewalk as unlawful interference with right to sell prop- erty, see "Constitutional Law," § 2. Warranty in lease of theater building, see "Landlord and Tenant," § 1.
*Clause in theater ticket, providing that if sold by the purchaser on the sidewalk it would be refused at the door, held valid.-Collister v. Hayman (N. Y.) 20.
*Theater ticket held a license revocable for violation of reasonable conditions.-Collister v. Hayman (N. Y.) 20.
See "Theaters and Shows."
Covenants of title, see "Covenants," § 1. Effect of appointment of receiver, see "Re- Effect of conditional sale, see "Sales," § 7. ceivers," § 1. Necessary to sustain action for partition, see "Partition," § 1.
Of amendatory statute, see "Statutes." § 3. Removal of cloud, see "Quieting Title." Sufficiency of title of vendor of land, see "Ven- dor and Purchaser," § 2.
Tax titles, see "Taxation," § 5.
To islands, see "Waters and Water Courses," § 2.
Liability of employer for defects, see "Master and Servant," §§ 4, 10.
By particular classes of parties.
See "Counties," § 2; "Infants," § 3; "Munici pal Corporations," § 12.
Employés, see "Master and Servant," § 10. Particular remedies for torts.
See "Trover and Conversion," § 1.
See "Assault and Battery," § 1; "Conspiracy," § 1; "Frauds"; "Libel and Slander"; "Mali- cious Prosecution"; "Negligence"; "Nuis- ance"; "Trover and Conversion." Abuse of process, see "Process," § 2. Causing death, see "Death," § 1. Civil damages from sale of liquors, see "In- toxicating Liquors," § 3.
*No person or combination of persons can legally obstruct or interfere with another in the conduct of his lawful business.-Purington v. Hinchliff (Ill.) 47.
See "Counties"; "Municipal Corporations"; "Schools and School Districts," § 1. Mandamus affecting right to custody of town funds, see "Mandamus," § 2.
Mandamus to town officers, see "Mandamus," § 3.
Repair of highways, see "Highways," § 2. § 1. Fiscal management, public debt, securities, and taxation.
Under Rev. Laws, c. 25, § 15, chapter 53. §§ 6-8, 12, 13, and chapter 208, § 102, town
For carriage of passengers, see "Carriers," § 5. held to have right to reimburse tree warden
For bringing action for wrongful death, see "Death," § 1.
For filing bill of exceptions, see "Exceptions, Bill of," § 2.
For filing objections in condemnation proceed- ings, see "Eminent Domain," § 3. For performance of gas lease, see "Mines and Minerals," § 2.
For redemption, see "Mortgages," § 5. Reasonable time as question for jury, see "Trial," § 4.
*Where the court on the 11th of April gave appellant 90 days in which to file bills of ex- ceptions, a filing on July 11th was too late. Lewis Tp. Imp. Co. v. Royer (Ind. App.) 1068.
and deputy tree warden for expense incurred in defense of trees in highways and village square.-Hixon V. Inhabitants of Sharon (Mass.) 909.
TRADE-MARKS AND TRADE-NAMES. Harmless error in injunction restraining use of trade-name, see "Appeal and Error," § 22. § 1. Registration, regulation, and of-
*Under 3 Starr & C. Ann. St. 1896, c. 140, par. 7, the sale of bottles of wine bearing coun- terfeit label held an offense.-Vincendeau v. People (Ill.) 675.
Under 3 Starr & C. Ann. St. 1896, c. 140, pars. 7, 8, a prosecution for the sale of goods bearing counterfeit label cannot be maintained except for acts done after the label has been filed with
* Point annotated. See syllabus.
the Secretary of State.-Vincendeau v. People (Ill.) 675.
In a prosecution for violation of 3 Starr & See "Taxation," § 6. C. Ann. St. 1896, c. 140, pars. 6, 7, by knowing- ly selling goods bearing a counterfeit label, an instruction held erroneous.-Vincendeau v. Peo- ple (Ill.) 675.
In a prosecution for violation of 3 Starr & C. Ann. St. 1896, c. 140, pars. 6, 7, by knowing- ly selling goods bearing a counterfeit label, cer- tain evidence held admissible on the question of guilty knowledge.-Vincendeau v. People (Ill.) 675.
In a prosecution for selling goods bearing a counterfeit label, in violation of 3 Starr & C. Ann. St. 1896, c. 140, par. 8, indictment held to sufficiently allege that the affidavit required by statute was filed with the Secretary of State. -Vincendeau v. People (Ill.) 675.
In a prosecution for violation of 3 Starr & C. Ann. St. 1896, c. 140, pars. 6, 7, by knowingly selling goods bearing a counterfeit label, an al- legation in the indictment that the goods were sold to a certain person held not to vary from the proof.-Vincendeau v. People (Ill.) 675.
§ 2. Infringement and unfair competi-
*Company held entitled to enjoin the use by other parties of a trade-name.-People v. Rose (Ill.) 42.
*An injunction restraining one from using a name as a trade-name held proper.-Cohen v. Nagle (Mass.) 276.
In a suit to restrain the use of a name as a trade-name, certain evidence held not to deprive plaintiff of his right to the name.-Cohen v. Nagle (Mass.) 276.
Certain use of a name held not to prevent one from adopting it as a trade-name.-Cohen v. Nagle (Mass.) 276.
Evidence in a suit to restrain the use of a name as a trade-name, showing the use of the name by others, held not to prevent plaintiff from acquiring a right to the name.-Cohen v. Nagle (Mass.) 276.
*In determining whether a manufacturer has a right to a trade-name, the question is whether a name, which had no recognized value, has been so used by him as to give it a value as a designation of articles of his manufacture.- Cohen v. Nagle (Mass.) 276.
*Where a manufacturer of an article has ac- quired a right of property in a name applied to the article of his manufacture, it is a fraud on him for another to use the word in selling a similar article.-Cohen v. Nagle (Mass.) 276.
TRANSITORY ACTIONS.
See "Venue," § 1.
Reimbursement for expenses, see "Towns," § 1. TRESPASS.
Liability for injuries to trespasser, see "Negli- gence," § 1. To the person, see "Assault and Battery," § 1; "False Imprisonment."
See "New Trial"; "Witnesses." Contributory negligence of passenger as ques- tion for jury, see "Carriers," § 8. Estoppel by verdict without judgment, see “Judg- ment," § 7.
Harmless error in civil actions, see "Appeal and Error," §§ 22, 25. Harmless error in criminal prosecutions, see "Criminal Law," § 15.
Instructions as part of record on appeal, see "Appeal and Error," §§ 9, 11. Instructions as to assessment of damages, see "Damages," § 3.
Instructions as to testamentary capacity, see Suits to try tax titles, see "Taxation," § 5. "Wills," § 2.
Proceedings incident to trials.
See "Continuance." Entry of judgment after trial of issues, see "Judgment," § 2.
Place of trial, see "Venue," § 2. Right to trial by jury, see "Jury," § 1. Summoning and impaneling jury, see "Jury," § 2.
Trial of actions by or against particular classes of parties.
See "Carriers," § 7; "Master and Servant," §§ 9, 10; "Municipal Corporations." §§ 11, 12; "Railroads," 8; "Street Railroads," § 2.
Trial of particular civil actions or proceedings. See "Carriers," §§ 3. 7; "False Imprisonment." § 1; "Libel and Slander," § 3; "Negligence." Condemnation proceedings, see "Eminent Do- main," § 3.
Validity of contract with in general, see "Con- For death caused by act of servant, see "Master For breach of contract, see "Contracts," § 5. tracts," § 1.
For death caused by operation of railroad, see "Railroads," § S.
For injuries caused by operation of street rail- road, see "Street Railroads," § 2.
Taxation of business of selling, giving, etc., For loss of or injury to cattle by carrier, see "Car- see "Taxation," § 1.
Of record for purpose of review, see "Appeal and Error," § 10; "Criminal Law," § 15.
TRANSFER OF CAUSES.
Between courts of same state, see "Courts," § 4.
For personal injuries, see "Carriers," § 7; "Master and Servant," § 9; "Municipal Cor- porations," §§ 11. 12; "Negligence," § 5; "Street Railroads," § 2.
For price of goods sold, see "Sales," § 5. On insurance policy, see "Insurance," §§ 10, 11. Probate proceedings, see "Wills," § 4. Suits in equity, see "Equity," § 3.
To foreclose mechanic's lien, see "Mechanics' Liens," § 5.
Point annotated. See syllabus.
« ПредыдущаяПродолжить » |