Page images

For cases in Dec.Dig. & Am.Dig. Key-No.Series & Indexes see same topic and KEY-NUMBER

37(2) (Mo.) In a prosecution against co-

conspirators for arson with intent to defraud
See Criminal Law, Om 706–730.

insurer, as defined by Rev. St. 1909, $ 4511,

evidence held sufficient to show that the de-

fendant who actually brought combustible ma-

terials into the building knew that it was in-
See Appeal and Error, C 1050; Intoxicating sured, and that he was guilty.-State v.

Liquors, w17; Principal and Agent, en Bersch, 207 S. W. 809.
34; War, em4.

34 (Mo.App.) In action to enjoin defend ASSAULT AND BATTERY.
ants' breach of their contract making plaintiff soe Criminol

See Criminal Law, Ow1170; Homicide; Rape,
their exclusive sales agent for coal produced

alem19, 44, 53.
by them, it was no defense that he had joined
the army, where he did not abandon his busi-

ness, but by himself and assistants carried it
on as before, as contract never contemplated

(B) Actions.
that plaintiff's part should be performed by him em 43(1) (Mo.App.) Instruction for plaintiff in
individually.-Warren v. Ray County Coal Co., action for assault should not include any refer-
207 S. W. 883.

ence to defendant having sought out plaintiff

and called him names, these facts being un-

necessary to predicate the rule of law therein
See Assault and Battery, Om64, 92; Criminal

stated, it being enough to entitle plaintiff to re-

cover that defendant, without just cause or ex-
Law, 406, 519, 1170.

cuse, unlawfully and violently assaulted him.--

Colby v. Thompson, 207 S. W. 73.

43(6) (Mo.App.) It was error for instruc-
63(3) (Tex.Cr.App.) An officer inay make an

tion in action for assault to authorize the jury
arrest without a warrant, where a felony or

to consider whether the injuries were perma-
an offense against the public peace is commit- |

nent; the petition not alleging they were, but
ted in his presence, under Code Cr. Proc. 1911, |

merely that plaintiff would suffer in the future
arîs. 254–260.--Harper v. State, 207 S. W. 96.

therefrom.-Colby v. Thompson, 207 S. W. 73.
A town marshal may make an arrest without

a warrant for a felony or an offense against
the public peace committed in his presence,

(A) Offenses.
where the ordinances of the city confer suchom 64 (Tex.Cr.App.) An officer making a law-
authority, under Code Cr. Proc, 1911, art. 261. ful arrest may use reasonable means neces-

sary, taking care that the force used is com-

mensurate with the necessity, under Pen. Code,

1911. art. 1014, subd. 5.-Harper v. State,
See Criminal Law, Em 371, 423, 427, 641, 763, 207 S. W. 96.
764, 800, 867, 1036.

(B) Prosecution and Panishment.
en 3 (Mo.) One accused of burning a build-
ing to collect the insurance thereon could not

Cm92 (Tex.Or.App.) In prosecution of town
have been guilty of intending to defraud the

marshal for aggravated assault, evidence held
insurer, unless he knew that insurance existed.

sufficient to sustain a finding that a "serious
-State v. Bersch, 207 S. W. 809.

bodily injury' was inflicted.-Harper v. State,
18 (Mo.) An indictment for arson, under

207 S. W. 96.
Rev. St. 1909, $ 4511, denouncing the burning

In a prosecution of a town marshal for ag-
of goods with intent to defraud insurer, need

gravated assault and infliction of serious bod-
not set forth the name of the owner who was

asily injury, evidence held to sustain a finding
the beneficiary of the insurance, nor state

| that the injured party was not making a forc-
facts constituting intended fraud upon the in-

ible resistance to arrest.--Id.
surer.-State v. Bersch, 207 S. W. 809.

In a prosecution for arson, under Rev. St.
1909, $ 4511, the indictment was not bad be- | See Drains. mw 66; Municipal Corporations,
cause, in alleging that the property was insur-

m566-567; Taxation, Om450.
ed to a named corporation and the policies
transferred to the corporation owning the

buildings destroyed, it failed to state by whom
• such policies were transferred.-Id.

See Action, Cm 57; Executors and Adminis-
m22 (Mo.) An indictment for arson, under trators, w158; Injunction, w118; Jus-
Rev. St. 1909, $ 4511, is not defective, because tices of the Peace, w124; Limitation of
it does not allege that any of defendants were Actions, C 95, 167; Mechanics' Liens, en
stockholders of the corporation owning the 204; Public Lands, Omw151, 178; Subroga-
property or otherwise interested in it; it not

tion. Cm31; Taxation, Cum 889; Trusts, em
being necessary under such statute that de-

20, 25.
fendant should have had any interest in the
property burned.--State v. Bersch, 207 S. W. I. REQUISITES AND VALIDITY.
Can 28 (Mo.) In a prosecution for arson, un-

(A) Property, Estates, and Rights Assign-

der Rev. St. 1909, $ 4511, evidence showing
what defendant paid for the stock in the build-

Om 8 (Tenn.) An agreement or covenant to
ing burned was admissible, as showing his es convey by an heir expectant and sui juris, if
timate of its value as compared with the fairly made and based on an available consid-
amount of insurance carried. --State v. Bersch. 1 eration, will be enforced as against the gran-
207 S. W. 809.

tor and privies, whenever the property comes
In prosecution for arson, under Rev. St. into his possession, but not until then.-Tate
1909, $ 4511, denouncing the burning of goods v. Greenlee, 207 S. W. 716.
to defraud the insurer, policies of insurance
on the property were admissible in evidence. !

(B) Mode and Sufficiency of Assignment.

Omw52 (Tex.Civ.App.) An agreement whereby
In a prosecution for arson, rejection of evi- merchants were to furnish to laborers goods
dence that defendant's former fellow stock- for which their employers were to pay from
holder was addicted to drink and guilty of wages due amounted to an equitable assign-
other improper conduct, which caused a dis- ment of the claims for wages.--Hess & Skinner
agreement between himself and defendant, was Engineering Co. v. Turney, 207 S. W. 171.

A transaction by which a bank loaned money






to contractors for payment of wages due labor-1 ASSUMPSIT, ACTION OF.
ers, which money was so used, held not to con-
stitute an equitable assignment of labor debts, See Judgment, C590; Trasts, 359; Work
nor subrogate the bank to the laborers' claims and Labor.
against contractor's surety.--Id.

An agreement by which laborers were paid
partly in cash and partly in board, but not
showing that the laborers agreed that any See Master and Servant, 204-226.
part of their wages should be paid for gro-
ceries, or that they knew such were bought
from claimant, does not constitute an equitable
assignment of laborers' wages to claimant.-Id.

| See Appeal and Error, em 1056; Evidence,
181, 472; Fraudulent Conveyances,

II. OPERATION AND EFFECT. Garnishment; Justices of the Peace, CD
C85 (Tex.Civ.App.) Assignment by bridge-

86; Mortgages, en 151; Statutes, 93;
building contractor of balance retained by coun-

Trial, 25.
ty on his contract, to bank, to secure its ad-

vanre of a sum which contractor used to pay
laborers' wages, was superior in equity to priorm 309 (Tex.Civ. App.) Claimant of attached
assignment of the same fund to contractor's property, who alleged ownership, did not, by
surety to secure it against liability on its bond, admitting for purpose of opening and closing
which had been previously executed, since that plaintiffs had good cause of action as set
surety parted with nothing, of value as consid-forth, under District and County Court Rule
eration for the assignment.--Hess & Skinner 31 (142 S. W. xx), admit that he was not owner
Engineering Co. v. Turney, 207 S. W. 171. of property.-Frost v. Smith, 207 S. W. 392.

In order that a prior assignment may have
precedence over a subsequent assignment, no-
tice of former assignment must have been giv-
en to the holder of the fund prior to the subse- See Appeal and Error, m171; Covenants,
quent assignment.-Id.

Om 132; Criminal Law, Om641, 714, 7201.),

723, 730, 867, 1090; District and Prosecut.
ASSIGNMENTS FOR BENEFIT OF ing Attorneys; Divorce, C 227; Evidence.

Com 265; Exchange of Property, w7; High-

ways, 90; Infants, most, 90; Insurance.

Cm668; Partition, w 106; Receivers,
See Limitation of Actions, Cw167.

154; Vendor and Purchaser, 320; Wit-

nesses, 154.
(A) Nature and Essentials of Trusts for II. RETAINER AND AUTHORITY.

Om76(1) (Mo.) The contract of an attorney
Omw 3 (Tex.Civ.App.) Where sellers and buyers

with his client is an entire and continuous
agreed that proceeds of note representing part an

one, and he cannot abandon the service of his
of consideration for goods should be applied

client without sufficient cause.-State F.
to payment of any and all debts or claims | Bersch. 207 S. W. 809.
against goods, held, that creditors of sellers

An attorney is charged with a duty, not
had an interest in note and were entitled to

only to obey the law, but to preserve his pro-
judgment for proportional amount of their

fessional integrity, and, if a condition arises
claims.-Warren v. Parlin-Orendorff Implement

where that duty conflicts with strict fidelity to
Co., 207 S. W. 586.
44 (Tex.Civ.App.) Although creditors of

his client's interest, he must withdraw from
sellers did not know, at time of its creation of

the case.-Id.

Any conduct on the part of a client during
trust in note given as part consideration for
goods, they had a right thereafter to affirm it

the progress of litigation, which would ten i

to degrade or humiliate the attorney, such as
and to enforce it in their favor, and, when
they affirmed trust, they were no longer simple

an attempt to sustain his case by any unlaw-
contract creditors.-Warren V. l'arlin-Oren-

ful means, justifies the attorney in withdraw-
dorff Implement Co., 207 S. W. 586.

ing from the case.--Id.


(A) In Aid of Assignment.

(A) Fees and Other Remuneration.
on 295(8) (Tex.Civ.App.) In suit by creditors

cm 145 (Mo.App.) Where attorney dismissed
of sellers to enforce a trust in note given bir

suit before judgment on second demurrer was
purchasers, allegation that purchasers, parties

formally entered, after having alleged in pe-
defendant, executed the note and signed the

tition all facts he had or was furnished with,
contract, creating the trust. authorized a judg. and alter having made effort to secure over-
ment against the purchasers for the amount

ruling of demurrer upon intimation by court
of the note.Warren v. Parlin-Orendorff Im that it was about to sustain demurrer, such
plement Co., 207 S. W. 586.

dismissal was not an abandonment of the case

within contract requiring him to fight case
(C) Claims and Liens Prior or Superior to through to a final determination.-King v.

Mann, 207 S. W. 836.
cm333 (Tex.Civ.App.) One who came into Where attorney, having agreed to fight case
possession of note given as part consideration to final determination, abandons case by dis-
for goods, and held in trust for benefit of cred. | missing it on demurrer before rendition of
itors of sellers, after note was due and had no-judgment thereon, he is not entitled to recover
tice of the facts, cannot complain that in suit compensation for services.--Id.
by creditors to realize on the note he was not o 167(2) (Mo. App.) In attorney's action for
awarded the residue.- Warren v. Parlin-Oren-compensation after having voluntarily dismiss-
dorff Implement Co., 207 S. W. 586.

ed action on demurrer before court's judgment

thereon, whether attorney had made effort to

obtain a favorable judgment before dismissing

case was for jury.-King v. Mann, 207 S. W.
See Appeal and Error, m1099; Contracts, 836.

108, 138; Insurance, Cm723-826; Judy i In attorney's action for compensation, wheth-
ment, 075; Parties, C 91; Religious Soer attorney fully performed his contract with
cieties, m4, 29, 31.

client held for the jury:-Id.



For cases in Dec.Dig. & Am.Dig. Key-No.Series & Indexes see same topic and KEY-NUMBER


See Negligence, On 23, 39; Railroads, am 23.

(D) Officers and Agents.

To 54(1) (Mo.App.) Where the clearing house
See Fraudulent Conveyances, Cw47.

refused to continue to clear for a bank unless
its directors put up a large sum in cash im-
mediately to take the place of assets which

were then charged off, held, that the advance-
See Appeal and Error, em 1050, 1067; Bro- ment to the bank by directors was supported
kers, 95; Chattel Mortgages, Om 277; / by a consideration, the advancement protect-
Insurance, 668; Judgment, 585, 956; ing their interest, as it appeared the bank
Municipal Corporations, On 706; New Trial, could not continue to do business if refused
Omw 85; Pledges, em4; Railroads, 348, the privileges of the clearing house; so that
350; Sales, 38, 52; Street Railroads, directors could not recover such money from

Om99, 114; Trial, enn 252; Vendor and Pur- the bank in action for money had and received.
- cbaser, m. 341.

-Deibel v. Jefferson Bank, 207 S. W. 869.

Where a clearing house declined to continue

to clear for a bank unless its assets were in-

creased, and directors advanced a sum to

the bank, which transierred to them assets
em 59 (Mo.) All examining magistrates, under written off of its books, held, that the direct-
Rev. St. 1909, $ 5027, and, in view of Rev. St. ors could not recover from the bank the sum
1899, § 7, p. 2543, the judge of the St. Louis , advanced; there being no agreement to repay,
court of criminal correction, may in felony on the theory that they must be considered as
(ases condition a recognizance upon the ap- trustees for the stockholders and entitled to
pearance of the accused, not only on a day | be indemnified for the sum advanced.-Id.
certain, but also in addition thereto "on any Though directors of a bank who advanced
future day to which the cause may be continu sums to it to enable it to continue enjoying the
ed."-State v. Berger, 207 S. W. 777.

privileges of a clearing house, which refused
90 (Mo.) In scire facias by state upon a to clear its checks unless its assets were in-
forfeited recognizance requiring the appear-creased, acted under duress, held that, where
ance of the principal before the court on May the directors by subsequent resolution turned
22, 1916, and on “any future date to which this over to the president, as trustee for directors,
said cause may be continued,” the burden was assets which the clearing house had directed
upon the state to show that the cause had been should be written off, and they accepted pay-
continued to the 2d day of June, at which time ments by the trustee, this was a ratification of
default was entered because the principal fail the contract.-Id.
ed to appear on the latter date.--State v.
Berger, 207 S. W. 777.
www 96 (Ky.) Ky. St. $$ 3155 and 3162, relating

to fines, penalties, and costs collected in police

(D) Collections.
court for a city of the second class, held not
to entitle a city of that class to the proceeds C 159 (Tex.Civ.App.) Where a bank, at
of a bail bond given to secure the appearance plaintiff's request, had forwarded a draft to
in police court of one to answer a warrant defendant bank which was accepted and paid
charging him with the crime of grand larceny; by defendant's cashier's check, but defendant
for, in view of section 3147 and Crim. Code

subsequently stopped delivery of its check be.
Prac. $858 and 94, a police court has no fore it was received by the first bank, facts
final jurisdiction in felony cases, but can sit

held to support a finding that the first bank
only as an examining court, and the bond could

merely acted as plaintiff's agent, and was not
be forfeited only in circuit court.-Reagan v. therefore a proper party to the suit as a pure
Greenfield. 207 S. W. 707.

chaser of the draft.-Farmers' Guaranty State
Under Ky. St. $ 1139, relating to fines and Bank of Jacksonville v. Burrus Mill & Ele-
forfeitures, the proceeds of a forfeited bail vator Co., 207 S. W. 400.
bond given in city police court to secure the
appearance of one to answer a warrant charg-

(F) Exchange, Money, Securities, and In-
ing him with grand larceny belong to the state,

and not the city.-Id.

em 1881/2 (Tex.Civ.App.) ID suit to recover
damages for wrongful failure of defendant bank

to make timely remittance in payment of pre-
See Innkeepers, Owll; Larceny, m15; mium on life policy, where evidence failed to

show that agreement to remit on the day in

question was based on a valuable consideration,

there could be no recovery based upon con-
See Assignments for Benefit of Creditors; tract liability.-Washington V. Austin Nat.
Champerty and Maintenance, 7.

Bank, 207 S. W. 382.

(H) Actions.
438 (Tex.Com. App.) Title of a bankrupt to

227 (3) (Tex.Civ.App.) Ip suit to recover
land, though not scheduled as an asset, passes

damages for wrongful failure of defendant bank
to his trustee, and, notwithstanding the bank-

to make timely remittance in payment of pre-
rupt's discharge, he cannot recover the same;

mium on life policy, evidence held insufficient
no facts being shown revesting title in him.-

to show that defendant was negligent in not
Raley v. D. Sullivan & Co., 207 S. W. 906.

remitting on the day in question,-- Washing-
ton v. Austin Nat. Bank, 207 S. W. 382.

In suit to recover damages for wrongful fail-

ure of defendant bank to make timely remit-
See Appeal and Error, 79: Assignments,

tance in payment of premium on life policy,
Em5285; Bills and Notes. 72. 426. 511. evidence held to show contributory negligence
Evidence. 317: Forgery, Om5. 12. 26. 29on the part of plaintill s.--Id.
34. 37; Garnishment. Om 164; Guardian and
Ward, C 130; Indictment and Information, BENEFICIAL ASSOCIATIONS.

110; Principal and Agents, em123; Sub-
rogation, 23, 31.

| See Insurance, w723-826.



| whom instrument is negotiated must have had

actual knowledge of infirmity, or of such facts
See Alteration of Instruments, C 9, 12; As-that his taking the instrument amounted to

signments for Benefit of Creditors, m3, 44, bad faith, is declarative of the pre-existing
295, 333; Banks and Banking. Om 159; Chat- law.-Id.
tel Mortgages, C 260; Continuance, 26; 332 (Ky.) "Actual notice," under Ky. St.
Counties, om 184; Courts, Ow121; Election $ 3720b, subsec, 56, providing that, to consti-
of Remedies, Cm7; Evidence, 76, 459, tute notice of infirmity, person to whom instru-
568; Exchange of Property, now 7; Execu- ment is negotiated must have had actual notice,
tors and Administrators, cm 158, 227; For- is either actual knowledge of the particular in-
gery, 5, 12, 26, 29, 34, 37; Fraud, mis firmity or actual knowledge of facts which, if
59; Fraudulent Conveyances, em 213; Hus- investigated, would disclose the defect.-Citi-
band and Wife, 156, 171, 273; Indictment zens' State Bank of Greenup v. Johnson Coun-
and Information, m110; Insurance, On 138, ty, 207 S. W. 8.
17912, 187; Interest, Om30; Judgment, O

342 (Ky.) The same standard for measur-
104, 145, 585, 948, 956; Limitation of Ac ing the good or bad faith of a purchaser of
tions, 167, 180; Lis Pendens, m4; Mort negotiable paper applies when he acts upon evi.
gages, 28; Partition, 97; Pleading, dence furnished by the face of the paper as
Cm104; Principal and Agent, 123, 177; when he is governed by facts aliunde the paper.
Subrogation, 23, 31; Tender, Ow7; Tres---Citizens' State Bank of Greenup v. Johnson
pass to Try Title, Ow4; Trial, 253; Us- County, 207 S. W. 8.
ury. Om 140: Vendor and Purchaser, Omw 89, 363 (Tex.Civ.App.) In action on notes orig-
187, 254, 320; Venue, Om72, 77.

inally attached to a contract order and detach-

ed by the payee, as permitted by the order, and
I. REQUISITES AND VALIDITY. sold to plaintiff, an innocent holder, for 76 per
(B) Form and Contents of Promissory

cent. of the face of the notes until the remainder
Notes and Duebills.

should be paid by the maker, the holder's re-

covery should be limited to 76 per cent. of the
47 (Tex.Civ.App.) A mere recital in a con- face of the notes.- Commercial Credit Co. v.
tract order that the purchase price of the goods | Giles. 207 S. W 596.
might be paid in notes attached thereto did not com 365(1) (Tex. Civ.Apr.) The maker of Dego-
make the payer's obligation a conditional one. -

| tiable notes attached to a contract order per-
Commercial Credit Co. v. Giles, 207 S. W. 596.

mitting their detachment by the payee would be

liable to an innocent holder even though the or.
(D) Acceptance.

der contract and notes were revoked in the
69 (Tex.Civ.App.) Acceptance of a draft hands of the pa yee and it could not maintain an
may be verbal, and need not be in writing. - action thereon against the maker.--Commercial
Farmers' Guaranty State Bank of Jacksonville ('redit Co, v, Giles, 207 S. W. 396.
v. Burrus Mill & Elevator Co., 207 S. W. 400. 378 (Ky.) To defeat the rights of a holder
C 70 (Ark.) Under Negotiable Instrument Act, of commercial paper in due course, a fraudu-
8 132, providing that drawee who destroys alent alteration must be a material one.-Citi-
bill will be deemed to have accepted the same, zens' State Bank of Greenup v. Johnson Coun-
drawee upon willfully destroying bill which he ty, 207 S. W. 8.
had not accepted in writing was liable thereon,
regardless of whether he had verbally accepted | VII. PAYMENT AND DISCHARGE.
bill.-Bailey & Co. v. Southwestern Veneer Co., 426 (Mo. App.) Where a stranger to a note
207 S. W. 34.

| paid the amount thereof to the holder through
C 70 (Tex.Civ. App.) An acceptance of a à bank, it is a question of intention whether the
draft may be implied from the drawee's con-

con | payment was in discharge of the note or in
duct-Farmers' Guaranty State Bank of Jack-purchase thereof. Stark v. Scherf, 207 S. W.
sonville v. Burrus Mill & Elevator Co., 207 |
S. W. 400.

Where a bank to which a note was sent for
Cm72 (Tex.Civ.App.) Where the drawer of

collection paid the bolder and transferred the
bill of exchange presents it to his bank which

note to a stranger, who paid the amount due
transmits it to defendant bank, which pays it

with intent to keep alive the obligation, the
by its cashier's check under an agreement with

makers of the note cannot complain and the in-
the drawee, incloses the remittance in an ad-

strument remains a subsisting obligation against
dressed and stamped envelope, and mails it,

such action makes defendant's acceptance a
finality, depriving both it and the drawee of

the right to withdraw the acceptance given. Oma 467 (2) (Tex.Com. App.) Petition, in action
Farmers' Guaranty State Bank of Jacksonville

on vendor's lien note, alleging the appointment
v. Burrus Mill & Elevator Co., 207 S. W. 400. of vendor's foreign administrator, who trans-

ferred all notes to one S., and that note in suit

was put in escrow by administrator and anoth-
Om 129(2) (Tex.Civ.App.) A note payable in er did not allege title under S. or any owner-
installments, and providing that on default of ship by S., and the word "transferred” meant
any installment the entire debt may be declar- | the written indorsement thereon, and not a le-
ed due, does not become due by the nonpay. gal assignment and delivery, or that the
ment of an installment, in the absence of a fer to S. postdated the escrow agreement.-
declaration to that effect by the holder.--Drink- / Webb v. Reynolds, 207 S. W. 914.
ard v. Jenkins, 207 S. W. 353.

Fmw485 (Tex.Com. App.) Rev. St. 1911, art.

588, and article 1906, subd. 9, requiring a de-
V. RIGHTS AND LIABILITIES ON IN nial under oath of genuineness of indorsement

or assignment of note, were not intended to

I dispense with proof of an administrator's au
(D) Bona Fide Purchasers.

thority to sell or assign, as such authority, un-
329 (Ky.) Ky. St. $ 3720b, subsec. 56, de der article 3480, depends upon an order of
claring that, to constitute notice of infirmity, court, so that absence of any verified denial of
person to whom instrument is negotiated must administrator's assignment thereof to plaintiff
have had actual knowledge of the infirmity, did not dispense with proof of its validity.-
having been passed since the execution of the Webb v. Reynolds, 207 S. W, 914.
bond sued on, its provisions will not govern the Om488 (Tex.Com.App.) The absence of a
rights of the parties, unless declarative of the sworn pleading questioning genuineness of a
pre-existing law.-Citizens' State Bank of written instrument does not dispense with its

up V. Johnson County, 207 S. W. 8. production in court; and, where a written in-
Ky. St. $ 3720b, subsec. 56, declaring that, strument is declared on and there is a general
to constitute notice of infirmity, person todenial, it is necessary to establish plaintill's

[ocr errors]


For cases in Dec.Dig. & Am.Dig. Key-No.Series & Indexes see same topic and KEY-NUMBER
case for him to offer the instrument in evidence. | not render survey void, as distances called for
-Webb v. Reynolds, 207 S. W. 914.

would be extended to reach the objects.-Spear-
uw 496 (1) (Tex.Com.App.) In action upon ven- man v. Mims, 207 S. W. 573.
dor's lien note, where plaintiff's pleadings show- 3(5) (Tex.Civ.App.) Distance being regard-
ed that it had been the property of an estate ed as more unreliable than course, it follows
of which an administrator was appointed in that, the greater the distance, the greater the
Kentucky and been placed with a bank under probability of error, and vice versa.--Matador
an escrow agreement between one of the own- | Land & Cattle Co. v. Cassidy-Southwestern
ers and the administrator the burden was on Commission Co., 207 S. W. 430.
plaintiff to show an order of court under Rev. 3 (6) (Tex.Civ.App.) An established original
St. 1911, art. 3480, authorizing a sale or as corner must control.-Chew v. De Ware, 207
signment by administrator to him.-Webb v. S. W. 988.
Reynolds. 207 S. W. 914.

The identification on the ground of the foot-
Om511 (Mo.App.) In an action on a note which steps of the surveyor determines the true
defendant claimed had been paid, it appearing I boundary .
that the holder had transmitted it to a bank 317) (Tex.Civ.App.) When unmarked lines
which took up the same and paid the holder, of adjacent surveys are called for, and when,
held that correspondence between the holder from the other calls of such adjacent surveys,
and such bank was admissible, as tending to the position of such unmarked lines can be
show payment.--Stark v. Scherf, 207 S. W. 863. / ascertained with accuracy, the unmarked lines
Cmw524 (Tex.Com.App.) The rule that plain- / will prevail over course and distance.--Mata-
tiff's possession or production in court of a dor Land & Cattle Co. v. Cassidy-Southwestern
note sued on is prima facie evidence of owner- Commission Co., 207 S. W. 430.
ship had no application, where the pleadings The fact that in field notes of a survey there
and evidence showed that he was not in posses- | is a call for an unidentified corner of a sur-
sion of a note sued on, but that it was held in vey ought not to be given controlling effect, if
escrow, and that its production was procured to do so is to entirely disregard calls for ad-
by an order requiring it to be brought into joining surveys and cause confusion and dis-
court.-Webb v. Reynolds, 207 S. W. 914. agreement.--Id.

537(1) (Tex.Civ.App.) Telephoning to 20(1) (Tex.Civ.App.) The owner of a lot
holder of note regarding extension, and failure abutting on a street acquires the fee to the
of holder to keep promise then made to meet middle of the street.-Summit Place Co. v.
maker, did not even raise a question for the Terrell, 207 S. W. 145.
jury on the issue as to whether there was 25 (Tex.Civ.App.) If there was a conflict
agreement for extension.-Thomas v. Derrick, between the two surveys in question, the older
207 S. W. 140.

survey would hold the land.-Erwin v. Morgan,
em 537(8) (Mo.App.) In an action on a note 207 S. W. 556.
which had been taken up by a bank which paid
the holder, held that the question whether the

note had been discharged and paid was, under

the evidence, for the jury.--Stark v. Scherf, 207

37(1) (Tex.Civ.App.) In suit to determine
S. W. 863.

true boundary between adjoining surveys, held,

that boundary was as claimed by plaintiff.-

Matador Land & Cattle Co. v. Cassidy-South-
See Explosives, ww12.

western Commission Co., 207 Ş. W. 130.

Om 40 (1) (Ky.) Extraneous evidence offered to

| identify lands included in a patent to land is-
See Commerce, w8.

sued by the state, which was void for uncer-

tainty, held not sufficient for submission to

jury.--Sproul v. Interstate Coal Co., 207 S.

W. 715.
See Negligence, m39.

0 5417) (Tex.Civ.App.) In an action, under
Rev. St. 1911, art. 3915, to recover statutory
penalty from county surveyor on account of

excessive fees charged for a survey made under
See Alteration of Instruments, 8, 9; Ap- | Vernon's Sayles' Ann, Civ. St. 1914, art. 5904c,

peal and Error, m1040, 1232, 1234; As- the fees prescribed in Rev. St. 1911, art. 3876,
signments, Om85; Bills and Notes, C 329; for surveying "land" will not be held to apply,
Counties, 64, 184; Guardian and Ward, where the land was covered by waters of Nue-
C5S, 180, 182; Highways, www90; Jus- ces Bay.-Redus v. Blucher, 207 S. W. 613.
tices of the Peace, 159; Municipal Cor-
porations, 942,' 955; New Trial, Cm75;

Pleading, Cw403; Principal and Surety, Oma
117; Schools and School Districts, mm 39; See Criminal Law, Cum 641, 867.
Sheriffs and Constables, 108; Trial, men
252, 350.


See Assignments, Om83; Counties, w123,
See Adverse Possession, 16, 66, 100; Ap-

peal and Error, m1010; Dedication, om

19; Easements, w58; Evidence, 83;

See Appeal and Error, Em756–773.
Waters and Water Courses, Em111; Wills,

3(2) (Tex.Civ.App.) In establishing bound See Accord and Satisfaction, Oml; Trial, em
aries, those calls will be adopted which are 250.
more certain, avoid conflicts in surveys, etc.,
and harmonize with the evident purpose of the

state in making the grant, even though a nat um 8(3) (Tex. Civ. App.) In a cross-action,
ural object must be disregarded.--Matador wherein commissions, damages, etc., were
Land & Cattle Co. v. Cassidy-Southwestern sought by defendant broker for breach of a
Commission Co., 207 S. W. 430.

contract to receive cattle purchased by plain-
C 3(3) (Tex.Civ.App.) Where calls of survey tiff, evidence held sufficient to sustain a find-
were for objects specified as on the ground ating that such cattle were purchased upon plain-
distances indicated, the fact that survey may | tiff's order.-Hollis Cotton Oil, I
not have closed according to a calculation made | Co. v. Marrs & Lake, 207 S. W. 367.
of distances called for in the field notes would! In an action wherein commissions, damages,



[ocr errors]


« EelmineJätka »