For cases in Dec.Dig. & Am.Dig. Key-No.Series & Indexes see same tople and KEY-NUMBER courts is not consent to be sued in federal court 356(7) (U.S.D.C.La.) Injunction pending (Const. Amend. 11).-Southern Ry. Co. V. appeal from denial of injunction is not authorQuery, 21 F. (2d) 333. ized by equity rule 74.-New York Life Ins. Co. v. Marshall, 21 F. (2d) 172. 303 (2) (U.S.C.C.A.Cal.) Action for penalty against California harbor commissioners for violating federal statute held not "suit against state" (Safety Appliance Acts [45 USCA §§ 2, 8-101).-Tilden v. U. S., 21 F.(2d) 967. 303(2) (U.S.D.C.S.C.) Suit to compel state to repay taxes illegally collected is suit against state.-Southern Ry. Co. v. Query, 21 F. (2d) 333. 313 (U.S.D.C.N.Y.) In action for death of seamen, court had no jurisdiction to determine controversy between defendant shipowner and engineering corporation, served with crosscomplaint (Jones Act [46 USCA § 688]: Civil Practice Act N. Y. § 193, subd. 2).-Wilson v. United American Lines, 21 F.(2d) 872. 314 (U.S.D.C.S.C.) Domestication of railroad corporation did not deprive it of right to invoke federal courts' jurisdiction on ground of diversity of citizenship.-Southern Ry. Co. v. Query, 21 F. (2d) 333. 323 (U.S.C.C.A.Ind.) Evidence held to warrant finding diversity of citizenship existed to give federal District Court jurisdiction-MeNichols v. International Typographical Union, 21 F. (2d) 497. (D) Jurisdiction Dependent on Amount or Value in Controversy. 365 (3) (U.S.C.C.A.Okl.) State court's decision as to validity of Indian allottee's lease is not binding on federal court.-U. S. v. Haddock, 21 F. (2d) 165. of 366(1) (U.S.C.C.A.Va.) Construction state statute by state courts will be followed by federal courts.-Union Indemnity Co. v. Dodd, 21 F. (2d) 709. 366 (8) (U.S.D.C.Minn.) Zoning ordinance, upheld by highest state court, will be declared invalid by federal court only when palpably unjustified as police measure.-American Wood Products Co. v. City of Minneapolis, 21 F.(2d) 440. 370 (U.S.D.C.S.C.) Federal courts are reluctant to declare state revenue statute in conflict with state Constitution before determination by state courts.-Doscher v. Query, 21 F. (2d) 521. cancel-371 (2) (U.S.D.C.La.) Equity power of United States court cannot be exercised if result conflicts with state statutes direct and applicable to sale and mortgage drawn in accordance with state statute.-In re Hagin, 21 F. (2d) 434. 328 (4) (U.S.D.C.La.) In suit for lation for fraud of insurance policies between same parties, federal courts may add amounts of the several policies for jurisdictional purposes.-New York Life Ins. Co. v. Marshall, 21 F. (2d) 172. 330 (U.S.C.C.A.Ind.) Finding that amount 371(6) (U.S.D.C.S.C.) Right under state in controversy in suit to enjoin union from sub- law to recover illegal taxes may be enforced in mitting to members proposed amendments to federal court if jurisdictional elements exist.constitution exceeded amount necessary to give Southern Ry. Co. v. Query, 21 F.(2d) 333. federal court jurisdiction held sustained by evi-372 (4) (U.S.D.C.La.) Interpretation of dence.--McNichols v. International Typographical Union, 21 F.(2d) 497. (E) Procedure, and Adoption of Practice of State Courts. 342 (U.S.C.C.A.W.Va.) Legal demand may be interposed by counterclaim in equity suit involving same transaction (equity rule No. 30).-Clifton v. Tomb, 21 F. (2d) 893. 342 (U.S.D.C.N.Y.) Action for damages for violating statute by making false reports as to resources of bank is law action (National Bank Act [12 USCA §§ 93, 161]; equity rule 26).Benton v. Deininger, 21 F. (2d) 657. 343 (U.S.D.C.N.Y.) Action for breach of contract against corporation and foreign gov ernment might proceed against corporation alone, where foreign government did not appear (Judicial Code, § 50 [Comp. St. § 1032]).Coale v. Société Co-op. Suisse des Charbons, Basle, 21 F. (2d) 180. 343 (U.S.D.C.N.Y.) In determining whether right of action against bank director for making false reports survives against deceased defendant's representatives, law of state must guide federal court (National Banking Act [12 USCA §§ 93, 161]).-Benton v. Deininger, 21 F. (2d) 659. contracts in case depending on mercantile law is to be sought in general jurisprudence; courts of United States not being bound by decisions of state courts (28 USCA § 725).-In re Hagin, 21 F. (2d) 434. 376 (U.S.D.C.Ohio) State statute excluding testimony of transactions with decedent is binding on federal courts.-Langsenkamp v. Broscalsa Chemical Co., 21 F.(2d) 207. 351/2 (U.S.C.C.A.W.Va.) Defendant had (B) State Courts and United States Courts, right to have counterclaim not replied to tak-493(3) (U.S.D.C.La.) Federal court held en pro confesso, and court erred in granting plaintiff's motion to dismiss bill and counterclaim without prejudice (equity rules of 1912, Nos. 16, 31).-Clifton v. Tomb, 21 F. (2d) S93. 354 (U.S.C.C.A.W.Va.) Party in default should show good cause before default pro confesso is set aside (equity rule No. 5).-Clifton v. Tomb, 21 F.(2d) 893. 356 (5) (U.S.C.C.A.W.Va.) Plaintiff cannot entirely ignore counterclaim setting up legal cause of action in equity suit, but must raise objection in trial court (equity rule No. 30).-Clifton v. Tomb, 21 F.(2d) 893. not to have equitable jurisdiction to adjudicate matter of defense to action at law in state court in cause not removable.-New York Life Ins. Co. v. Marshall, 21 F. (2d) 172. 502 (U.S.C.C.A.N.J.) District Court held without jurisdiction to adjudicate claim for repairs to vessel in custody of customs collector after seizure for violating Tariff Act (Tariff Act of 1922, §§ 602, 607-609, 613 [19 USCA §§ 509, 514-516, 520]).-The Motor Boat No. L-7869, 21 F. (2d) 594. Facts held to show customs collector did not abandon seizure of motorboat for violation of Tariff Act (Tariff Act of 1922, §§ 602, 607, 609 [19 USCA §§ 509, 514, 516]).-Id. (D) Different United States Courts. 5272 (U.S.D.C.Va.) Law relative to transfer of causes to different division of district held inapplicable where divisions were created by rule of court (Judicial Code [28 USCA §§ 114, 119, 121, 122, 142, 144, 145, 150-152, 156, 157, 159, 168-171, 173, 180, 181, 187-190, 193]).-Patrick Jobbing Co. v. Globe & Rutgers Fire Ins. Co., 21 F. (2d) 106. Civil transitory action removed by nonresident defendant may be transferred to another division created by rule of court within district (Judicial Code § 29 [28 USCA § 72]).—Id. VII. FORMER JEOPARDY. 170 (U.S.D.C.III.) Defendant, securing decision that indictment was invalid, is estopped, when subsequently indicted, to assert that former indictment was valid.-U. S. v. Owen, 21 F. (2d) 868. 177 (U.S.D.C.III.) Order quashing or dismissing indictment, or sustaining demurrer thereto, is not such jeopardy as will bar subsequent prosecution for same offense.-U. S. v. Owen, 21 F. (2d) 868. Court's action with respect to particular count held not a placing of defendants in jeopardy, barring subsequent prosecution on identical count (Criminal Code, §§ 85, 117 [Comp. St. §§ 10253, 10287]; Const. Amend. 5).-Id. 195(1) (U.S.C.C.A.Kan.) Test of identity of offenses, as respects double jeopardy, is whether same evidence is required to sustain them.-McIntosh v. White, 21 F.(2d) 934. 200(6) (U.S.D.C.III.) Prosecution for conspiracies to illegally sell and transport sacramental wine held not bar to prosecution for conspiracies to violate bribery and extortion statutes, on theory that only one conspiracy was involved (Criminal Code, $$ 85, 117 [Comp. St. §§ 10253, 10287]).-U. S. v. Owen, 21 F.(2d) 868. Single conspiracy cannot be split up for purpose of prosecution.-Id. Acquittal on charges of conspiracy to illegally sell and transport wine held not res judicata in prosecution for conspiracies to violate bribery and extortion statutes (Criminal Code, §§ 85, 117 [Comp. St. §§ 10253, 10287]).—Id. (A) Judicial X. EVIDENCE. Notice, Presumptions, and Burden of Proof. 306 (U.S.C.C.A.Mo.) One presumption cannot be basis of another presumption.-Niederluecke v. U. S., 21 F. (2d) 511. (C) Other Offenses, and Character of Accused. 369 (2) (U.S.C.C.A.Mo.) Evidence that three weeks after defendants transported stolen automobiles they had possession of another stolen car held incompetent (National Motor Vehicle Theft Act [18 USCA § 408]).-Niederluecke v. U. S., 21 F.(2d) 511. Evidence of commission by defendant of another crime is generally incompetent, unless one offense tends clearly to prove commission of the other.-Id. 374 (U.S.C.C.A.Mo.) Evidence held insufficient to sustain finding that defendant had possession of stolen automobile.-Niederluecke v. U. S., 21 F. (2d) 511. (D) Materiality and Competency in Gen. eral. 382 (U.S.C.C.A.Ark.) Acts testified to held sufficiently connected with defendant to be admissible.-Hooker v. U. S., 21 F. (2d) 932. 394 (U.S.C.C.A.Mich.) Evidence found in search of private dwelling with consent of own. er held admissible (18 USCA § 53).-Schutte v. U. S., 21 F.(2d) 830. 394 (U.S.D.C.N.Y.) Evidence of seizure of liquor under illegal search warrant will be suppressed.-U. S. v. Boscarino, 21 F. (2d) 575. 395 (U.S.D.C.N.Y.) Documents unlawfully obtained under search warrant cannot be kept from owner or used by government in liquor prosecution.-U. S. v. Spallino, 21 F.(2d) 567. (E) Best and Secondary and Demonstra tive Evidence. 402(1)(U.S.C.C.A.Iowa) Admission of sec ondary evidence of letter held not error.-Miller v. U. S., 21 F.(2d) 32. 402 (I) (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) Secondary proof of contents of lost books held proper in bankrupts' trial for concealing assets.-Kanner v. U. S., 21 F. (2d) 285. (F) Admissions, Declarations, and Hear say. 406 (3) (U.S.C.C.A.Va.) Accused's statements to government agent held admissible as voluntary admissions tending to prove guilt (Criminal Code, § 37 [18 USCA § 881).-Baker v. U. S., 21 F. (2d) 903. (J) Testimony of Accomplices and Codefendants. 512 (U.S.C.C.A.III.) Charge of collusion between prosecution and one defendant testifying held unsupported by record.-Brims v. U. S., 21 F. (2d) 889. (M) Weight and Sufficiency. 552(3) (U.S.C.C.A.Mo.) Circumstantial evidence to sustain conviction must exclude For cases in Dec.Dig. & Am.Dig. Key-No.Series & Indexes see same topic and KEY-NUMBER every reasonable hypothesis but that of accused's guilt.-Van Gorder v. U. S., 21 F. (2d) 939. (C) Reception of Evidence. 680(1) (U.S.C.C.A.Va.) Order of admitting testimony is largely in trial court's discretion.-Baker v. U. S., 21 F. (2d) 903. Objection that government presented evidence irregularly in prosecution for conspiracy to violate National Prohibition Act held without merit (27 USCA; Criminal Code, § 37 [18 USCA § 88]).-Id. 684 (U.S.C.C.A.Iowa) Admission of testimony in rebuttal which should have been offered in main case is discretionary.-Miller v. U. S., 21 F.(2d) 32. (D) Objections to Evidence, Motions to Strike Out, and Exceptions. 695(1) (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) Objection to testimony as far as affecting one defendant held ineffectual, where testimony was admissible against another defendant.-Vachuda v. U. S., 21 F.(2d) 409. (F) Province of Court and Jury in General. 768 (3) (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) Charge urging jury to agree, but cautioning them that it was duty of each juror to follow own conscientious conviction about case, and every phase of it, held not error.-Vachuda v. U. S., 21 F.(2d) 409. (H) Requests for Instructions. 824 (5) (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) Failure to instruct that evidence was not binding on one of defendants held not reversible, in absence of request for instruction.-Vachuda v. U. S., 21 F. (2d) 409. 1038(3) (U.S.C.C.A.Minn.) Failure to instruct on character evidence or entrapment, in absence of request or exception to charge, presents nothing for review.-Boehm v. U. S., 21 F. (2d) 283. 1044 (U.S.C.C.A.Mo.) In criminal case, trial errors, though not challenged by motions. federal appellate court may correct serious -Van Gorder v. U. S., 21 F. (2d) 939. criminal 1048 (U.S.C.C.A.Mo.) In case, federal appellate court may correct serious trial errors, though not challenged by exceptions.-Van Gorder v. U. S., 21 F. (2d) 939. 1056(1) (U.S.C.C.A.Minn.) Failure to instruct on character evidence or entrapment, in absence of request or exception to charge, presents nothing for review.-Boehm v. U. S., 21 F. (2d) 283. (C) Proceedings for Transfer of Cause, and Effect Thereof. 1070 (U.S.C.C.A.Colo.) On death of defendant before judgment, writ of error will be dismissed.-Rossi v. U. S., 21 F. (2d) 747, vacating, in part, judgment 16 F. (2d) 712. 1072 (U.S.C.C.A.Minn.) Trial court need not grant writ of error, where assignments charge no error reviewable by appellate court. -U. S. ex rel. Yuck Kee v. Sanborn, 21 F. (2d) 745. (E) Assignment of Errors and Briefs. 1129(1) (U.S.C.C.A.Mo.) In criminal case, federal appellate court may correct serious trial errors, though not challenged by assignments of error.-Van Gorder v. U. S., 21 F. (2d) 939. (F) Dismissal, Hearing, and Rehearing. 1131(4) (U.S.C.C.A.Mich.) Writ of error, manifestly brought only for delay, will be promptly dismissed, if brought to attention of court.-Alberts v. Ü. S., 21 F.(2d) 968. (G) Review. 1151 (U.S.C.C.A.S.C.) Ruling on continuance is not reviewable except for abuse of discretion.-Saleeby v. U. S., 21 F. (2d) 713. 1151 (U.S.C.C.A.Va.) Motions for continuance are addressed to trial court's discretion, and rulings thereon are not reviewable, unless discretion abused.-Baker v. U. S., 21 F. (2d) 903. 1158(3) (U.S.C.C.A.lowa) Denial of new trial for disqualification of juror on conflicting affidavits will not be disturbed.-Miller v. U. S., 21 F.(2d) 32. 829 (1) (U.S.C.C.A.III.) Trial judge has right to prepare his own instructions applica-1159(2) (U.S.C.C.A.III.) Circuit Court of ble to issues.-Brims v. U. S., 21 F. (2d) SS9. Appeals cannot weigh evidence.-Bartkus v. U. S.. 21 F. (2d) 425. (I) Objections to Instructions or Refusal Thereof, and Exceptions. 1159(2) (U.S.C.C.A.Neb.) Conviction must be reversed when all substantial evidence is as consistent with innocence as with guilt.-Haning v. U. S., 21 F. (2d) 508. 1159(2) (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) Verdict finding defendants guilty cannot be disturbed by Circuit Court of Appeals, if evidence was sufficient to go to jury as to each defendant.-Vachuda v. U. S.. 21 F.(28) 409. 1167(1) (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) Since bankrupts were not surprised nor prejudiced thereby, denial of application for bill of particulars of concealed assets held not reversible error.-Kanner v. U. S., 21 F. (2d) 285. ~1169(7) (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) Testimony that one alleged conspirator and defendant referred to another alleged conspirator and defendant as the boss held harmless, where first conspirator had made similar reference before conspiracy ended (Criminal Code [18 USCA § 88]). Vachuda v. U. S., 21 F. (2d) 409. 1173(2) (U.S.C.C.A.Ark.) In prosecution for subornation of perjury, denial of requested charge as to defendant's knowledge of false swearing held not prejudicial error.-Hooker v. U. S., 21 F. (2d) 932. (H) Determination and Disposition of Cause. 1186(4) (U.S.C.C.A.Iowa) Admission of incompetent testimony held not ground for reversal (Judicial Code, § 269, as amended by Act Feb. 26, 1919 [28 USCA § 391]).-Miller v. U. S., 21 F. (2d) 32. 1186(4) (U.S.C.C.A.Okl.) Duplicity in information is not mere technical defect to be disregarded under statute (Judicial Code, § 269, as amended [28 USCA § 391]; 18 USCA § 556).-Creel v. U. S., 21 F.(2d) 690. XVII. PUNISHMENT AND PREVENTION OF 1210 (U.S.C.C.A.Kan.) Petitioner, convicted on three counts and sentenced to 5 years' imprisonment on each, held properly committed to prison for 15 years.-McIntosh v. White, 21 F. (2d) 934. 1213 (U.S.C.C.A.Minn.) Concurrent sentences of five years for illegal sales of opium held not unconstitutional (Harrison Anti-Narcotic Act. § 9 [26 USCA § 705]: Const. Amend. 8). Boehm v. U. S., 21 F. (2d) 283. CUSTOMS AND USAGES. held not to conflict with Treasury regulation permitting entry of goods without bill of lading on giving bond (Tariff Act Oct. 3, 1913, § 111, B [Comp. St. § 5519]; Regulations of Treasury Department, arts. 219, 220).-Giles v. Newton, 21 F. (2d) 484. VII. VIOLATIONS OF CUSTOMS LAWS. 133(4) (U.S.D.C.Vt.) User of automobile in smuggling, who had property interest in it, was party to forfeiture suit.-U. S. v. One Buick Automobile, 21 F. (2d) 789. 133(11) (U.S.D.C.Mass.) Facts held to establish reasonable cause for filing information for forfeiture of smuggled goods (Tariff Act [19 USCA §§ 497, 525]).-U. S. v. 394 Cases of Lawson Scotch Whisky, 21 F. (2d) 989. DAMAGES. III. GROUNDS AND SUBJECTS OF COMPENSATORY DAMAGES. (A) Direct or Remote, Contingent, or Prospective Consequences or Losses, 18 (U.S.C.C.A.Iowa) No recovery can be had unless damages are proximate result of some wrong or breach of duty.-Majestic Co. v. Orpheum Circuit, 21 F. (2d) 720. IV. LIQUIDATED DAMAGES AND PENALTIES. col-85 (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) Liquidated damage clause in shipbuilding contract held to apply as against surety, notwithstanding contract was abandoned by builder.-Southern Pac. Co. v. Globe Indemnity Co., 21 F. (2d) 288. 8 (U.S.C.C.A. Wash.) Seamen cannot lect wages for overtime under custom, in violation of mandatory provisions of statute (Seamen's Act 1915 [46 USCA § 673]).—Ramsauer v. U. S., 21 F. (2d) 907. CUSTOMS DUTIES. III. COLLECTION DISTRICTS AND OF FICERS. 53 (U.S.D.C.N.Y.) Regulations of Treasury Department, prescribing methods to be followed in making entry of goods, have force and effect of law.-Giles v. Newton, 21 F.(2d) 484. Treasury Department regulations do not alter or amend customs law but only regulate mode carrying it into effect.-Id. 55 (U.S.D.C.N.Y.) Collector of customs, giving possession of goods to wrong party, cannot defeat action for conversion because control over goods was merely for customs purposes (Regulations of Treasury Department, arts. 219, 220).-Giles v. Newton, 21 F. (2d) 484. Collector of customs, permitting party not owner or consignee to enter goods, pay duties, and take them, held liable for conversion (Tariff Act Oct. 3, 1913, § 111, B [Comp. St. § 5519]; Regulations of Treasury Department, arts. 219, 220).-Id. Consignor of goods holding bill of lading consigned to his own order, indorsed per pro consignor, by his attorney, held proper party to sue for conversion of goods (Tariff Act Oct. 3, 1913, § 111, B [Comp. St. § 5519]).-Id. Customs collector, refusing to permit consignor of goods consigned to his order to enter goods and pay duty, held liable for conversion Tariff Act Oct. 3, 1913, § 111, B [Comp. St. § 5519]; Regulations of Treasury Department, arts. 219, 220).-Id. Pro forma invoice, not shown to have been brought to notice of plaintiff consignor, held not to relieve collector of customs from liability for delivery to wrong party (Regulations of Treasury Department, arts, 219, 220).-Id. Subordinate's releasing goods to wrong party held no defense to collector of customs, in view of stipulation (Regulations of Treasury Department, arts. 219, 220).-Id. IV. ENTRY AND APPRAISAL OF GOODS, 63 (U.S.D.C.N.Y.) Statute relating to ownership of imported goods for customs purposes Contractor cannot be liable under liquidated damage clause for delays caused solely by owner in completing work after contractor abandons contract.-1d. VI. MEASURE OF DAMAGES. (C) Breach of Contract. 118 (U.S.C.C.A.N.J.) Contract provision, fixing legal measure of damages, will be enforced.-Monument Pottery Co. v. Imperial Coal Corporation, 21 F. (2d) 683. 120(3) (U.S.D.C.Mass.) Measure of damages for breach of contract for building work is difference between contract price and fair mar ket value of work.-In re Carrier, 21 F. (2d) 589. For cases in Dec.Dig. & Am.Dig. Key-No.Series & Indexes see same topic and KEY-NUMBER Warrants not secured by first and paramount lien as bonds previously issued are not pay able on parity therewith (Acts Ark. 1903, p. 278).-Id. Contractor receiving warrants with knowledge that bonds previously issued constituted first lien was estopped, as against innocent bondholders, from destroying or impairing lien. -Id. 49 (U.S.C.C.A.Neb.) Legality of notice to bidders, which induced contract in suit, held not in issue, where contract was admitted.-Drainage Dist. No. 1 of Lincoln County, Neb., v. Rude, 21 F.(21) 257. Provision of contract for construction of drains permitting district to increase or diminish quantities held not to authorize it to eliminate more than half the work contracted for.Id. 49 (U.S.C.C.A.S.D.) County cannot be compelled to pay for current retards constructed for drainage district by general assessment but only by assessment on lands benefited (Const. S. D. art. 21. § 6; Rev. Code S. D. 1919. $$ 84668470, 8473-8475, 8477-8491; §§ 8458-8465, 8471, 8472, 8476, as amended).-Woods Bros. Const. Co. v. Yankton County, S. D., 21 F.(2d) 267. One constructing current retards for drainage district is entitled to judgment against county payable by assessment upon lands in district, levy of which may be compelled by mandamus (Const. S. D. art. 21, § 6; Rev. Code S. D. 1919, §§ 8466-8470, 8473-8475, 8477-8491; $$ 84588465, 8471, 8472, 8476, as amended).-Id. Complaint against county for current retards held to sufficiently allege claim was presented and not paid (Rev. Code S. D. 1919, § 5898). -Id. ELECTION OF REMEDIES. 7(2) (U.S.C.C.A.Minn.) Notice of rescission of contract precludes subsequent claim for damages for its breach.-Albert Lea Foundry Co. v. lowa Sav. Bank of Marshalltown, Iowa, 21 F. (2d.) 515. ELECTRICITY. void, as taking citizen's property and giving it to another (Or. L. §§ 9172, 9175, as amended by Laws 1927, pp. 426, 427).-Beck v. Patterson, 21 F. (2d) 72. EQUITY. I. JURISDICTION. PRINCIPLES, AND MAXIMS. (B) Remedy at Law and Multiplicity of Suits. 43 (U.S.D.C.S.C.) Equity will assume jurisdiction where remedy at law is doubtful.Southern Ry. Co. v. Query, 21 F. (2d) 333. (C) Principles and Maxims of Equity. 54 (U.S.D.C.La.) Aid of equity courts can be invoked only by those acting in good conscience, good faith, and with reasonable diligence. In re Hagin, 21 F. (2d) 433. 56 (U.S.C.C.A.S.C.) Equity regards substance, and not form.-Ellerbe v. Studebaker Corporation of America, 21 F. (2d) 993. 65 (2) (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) Things done by plaintiff without right held not so closely related to issue in suit as to disqualify it for relief under rule of clean hands.-Andrew Jergens Co. v. Bonded Products Corporation, 21 F. (2d) 419, modifying decree (D. C.) 13 F. (2d) 417. Owner of soap, by changing formula for making it, held not deprived of right to equitable relief against unfair competition, under principle of clean hands.-Id. 66 (U.S.C.C.A.S.D.) Court may condition equitable relief granted to complainant with enforcement of opposing equities of defendant, though barred by limitation.-Larson v. First State Bank of Vienna, S. D., 21 F. (2d) 936. II. LACHES AND STALE DEMANDS. 71(1) (U.S.C.C.A.Pa.) To constitute "laches" delay must have been to advantage of one party or to prejudice of the other.-Farmers' Bank of McSherrystown v. Halsey, Stuart & Co., 21 F. (2d) 818. 82 (U.S.C.C.A.Minn.) Institution of prior suit, not diligently prosecuted, does not itself excuse laches in bringing subsequent suit.Backus-Brooks Co. v. Northern Pac. Ry. Co., 21 F. (2d) 4. IX. MASTERS AND COMMISSIONERS, AND PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THEM. 16(2) (U.S.C.C.A.Iowa) Those in control of highly charged electric wires must exercise high decree of care in insulation and inspection. -Reynolds v. Iowa Southern Utilities Co., 21409 (U.S.C.C.A.Mich.) Force and effect of F. (2d) 958. 19(6) (U.S.C.C.A.Iowa) Proximate cause of injury to boy from contact with electric wire held for jury.-Reynolds v. lowa Southern Utilities Co.. 21 F. (2d) 958. 19(7) (U.S.C.C.A.Iowa) Negligence in failing to safely insulate electric wire running through tree in street used by boys in play held for jury. Reynolds v. Iowa Southern Utilities Co.. 21 F. (2d) 958. 19(12) (U.S.C.C.A.Iowa) Contributory negligence of boy injured by electric wire held for jury. Reynolds v. Iowa Southern Utilities Co., 21 F.(2d) 958. EMINENT DOMAIN. I. NATURE, EXTENT, AND DELEGATION 2(1) (U.S.D.C.Minn.) Zoning ordinance, forbidding additions to factories or new factories in "multiple dwelling" district, held not invalid as taking property for public purpose without compensation (Laws Minn. 1921, c. 217, § 1, as amended by Laws Minn. 1923, c. 364).American Wood Products Co. v. City of Minneapolis, 21 F. (2d) 440. master's findings depend on nature of case and terms of reference.-Edward G. Budd Mfg. Co. v. C. R. Wilson Body Co., 21 F.(2d) 803, affirming decree (D. C.) 7 F. (2d) 746. District Court had right to review master's findings of fact after reference for purpose of taking testimony.-Id. Master's findings, constituting only deductions from established facts, do not carry great weight.-Id. Master's findings on validity and infringement of patent being questions of law, District Court is justified in reviewing them.-Id. X. DECREE AND ENFORCEMENT 420 (U.S.C.C.A.W.Va.) When bill is taken pro confesso, defaulting party has no standing in court and cannot adduce any evidence or be heard (equity rule No. 16).-Clifton v. Tomb, 21 F. (2d) 893. Bill confessed by default is deemed true in matters alleged with certainty but matters not alleged with certainty or not admitting of certainty must be proved.-Id. EQUITY RULES. 2(1) (U.S.D.C.Or.) Oregon Stock Inspection Law held beyond power of Legislature and See Court Rules Cited or Construed. |