Sidebilder
PDF
ePub
[ocr errors]

TO THE

FOUR VOLUMES CONTAINED IN THIS BOOK.

86, 87, 88 89

ACTION.

sufficient, may be removed here for re-examination
1. Upon ranty, of payment, a suit may be by writ of error or appeal.
commenced against the guarantor without previous

Coit v. Robinson,

152
suit against the principal.

7. Suits in equity and cases at law, under the
Memphis v. Brown,

264 jurisdiction created by the Bankrupt Act, may be
2. The right to enforcé redemption of a bond removed to the Circuit Court for re-examination,
from a fund, by mandamus, or to damages for a re-

under section 8 of the Act.
fusal to redeem, is an incident of the bond, and can

Idem,

152
only be established by its holder.

8. An appeal does not lie to this court from a de-
Idem.

264 cree of the Circuit Court rendered in the exercise
3. Where the duty of the collection of an account of the supervisory jurisdiction conferred upon
is iinposed upon a party by a contract, he cannot

that court by the first clause of section 2 of toe.
recover from the other party for services for its Bankrupt Act.
collection.

Idem,

152
Idem.

264

9. This court will on appeal presume that the
court below construed correctly its own rules where

the rule is not set out in the record.
ADMINISTRATORS AND EXECUTORS. Packet Co. v. Sickles,

203

10. From the order of the District Court disbar-
1. The several States of the Union have full coa: ring an attorney, neither an appeal nor a writ of
trol over the estates of deceased persons within

error will lie.
their respective limits.

Ex partc Robinson,

205
Yonley v. Larender,

536
2. The United States courts cannot execute judg. the District Court, to the Circuit Court, in a pro-

11. Where an appeal is taken from the decree of
ment against the estates of deceased persons in the ceeding in rem, the property or proceeds thereof
course of administration in the States, contrary to

follows the cause into the Circuit Court.
the declared law of the State on the subject.

Wilson v. Bell,

259
Idein,

536

12. Where a referee finds generally in favor of
3. The administration laws of a State will be ob-

the plaintiff, no error can be assigned upon such a
served by the Federal Courts in the enforcement

finding.
of individual rights.

Tioga R. R. Co. v. B. & C. R. R. Co., 331
Idem,

530

13. Where questions of fact only are presented
4. On a judgment in a Federal Court against an by an appeal and there is no dispute as to the law,
administrator, the real estate of the intestate can- and the two courts below have already found
not be sold. contrary to the laws of the State against the appellant, the burden is on him to show
upon that subject.

error.
Idem,

536

Every presumption is in favor of the de.
crees below, and this court ought not to reverse

unless the error is clear.
APPEAL AND ERROR.

Rogers 1. The s. B. Wheeler,

38.5

14. A judgment of a state court, of reversal only
SEE CERTIORARI, 1-3.

and remanding the suit to the inferior court for å
JURY, 1-6.

new trial or a new hearing, is not a final judgment
MANDAMUS, 4.

which this court can review.
1. Where a writ of error is prosecuted for delay,

Parcels v. Johnson,

410
ten per cent. damages in addition to interest will be 15. This court cannot examine the evidence to
given on affirmance.

ascertain whether the jury was justified in finding
Hall v. Jordan,

47

as it did upon the issues of fact.
2. Where a jury is waived and the trial is by the

Erpress Co. v. W'are,

422
çourt and the finding is general, nothing can be re- 16. Where, in an equity case, a demurrer is filed
viewed on a writ of error except the rulings of the to the complaint, and an answer is subsequently
court made in the progress of the trial.

filed, upon which the parties proceed to a hearing
Cooper v. Omohundro,

47 | it will be presumed on appeal that the demurrer
Creios v. Brewer,

63

was abandoned.
Insurance Co. v. Sea,

611
Basey v. Gallagher,

452
3. An appeal in admiralty from the district to 17. Where a delivery of goods is proved by in-
the Circuit Court vacates the decree of the district proper testimony, if it be afterwards proved by
court, and a new trial and a new decree are to be proper testimony, the allowance of the first testi.
had in the Circuit Court. The latter must execute mony is not ground of error.
its own decree, and the district court has nothing

Cooper v. Coates,

481
more to do with the case.

18. This court cannot go out of the record, to
The Lucille v. Res pa88,

61 the opinion or elsewhere, to re-examine any ques.
4. An order of the Circuit Court merely affirming tion under a writ of error to a State Court.
the decree of the District Court and nothing more,

Edwards 1. Elliott.

487
is not a final decree from which an appeal lies to Moore r. Mississippi,

6.3
this court.

19. Where the State Court amended its judgment

64 after the writ of error, the judgment brought here
5. A writ of error lies from this court to the Su- as part of the return to the writ of error from this
preme Court of the District of Columbia, by virtue court, must remain as the judgment which this
of the Act of 1801, although the proceedings are court will re-examine and review.
governed by a statute of Maryland, which does not

Idem,

653
provide for an appeal or writ of error.

20. This court will not reverse because a demur-
R. R. Co. v. Church,

97 was wrongly overruled if there was another
6. Cases arising under the third clause of sec- plea which covers the same ground, and presents
tion 2 of the Bankrupt Act, where the amount is the same issue. Chambers Co. v. Clew8, 517

Idem,

!

rer

21. Where the execution of bonds sued on is not 6. Exceptions, to be of any avail, must present
put in issue, the objection that there was no evi- distinctively and specifically the ruling objected
dence that the bonds were authorized to be issued to. The words "exceptions allowed” at the end of
by the defendants, or that the seal annexed was a bill of exceptions are not sufficient.
the seal of the defendants, was not valid.

Idem,

611
Chambers Co. 1. Clews,

517 7. Under Rule 29 the justice taking the security
22. The objection that there was no revenue on appeal is the sole and exclusive judge of what
stamp, upon the bonds is not available where the it should be.
bill of exceptions does not state whether any or Jerome v. McCarter,

515
what stamps were on the bonds.

8. If, after the security has been accepted, the
lidem,

517 circumstances have changed, so that security which
23. Where it is objected that the decree adjudg. was good and sufficient, at the time it was taken.
ing a debtor to be a bankrupt was procured by does not continue to be so, this court may order
fraud, such frand should be specifically pointed out, new security.
and the evidence to support the objection should be Idem,

515
referred to in the assignment of errors.

9. The proper security on an appeal in a mort.
Michaels 1. Post,

520 gage foreclosure case considered.
24. When the cause is tried by the court, and Idem,

51.
there are no exceptions, and the finding of facts is 10. Under the Bankrupt Act, no appeal will be al-
special, this court can only review the sufficiency lowed in any case from the District to the Circuit
of the facts found, to support the judgment. Court, unless it is claimed and notice given both to
Jennison v. Leonard,

539 the clerk and to the other party within ten days
25. To warrant the reversal of a judgment, after the entry of the decree or decision appealed
there must be not only error found in the record, from.
but the error must be such as may have worked Wood v. Bailey,

689
injury to the party complaining.
Decatur Bank v. Home Sav. Bk.,

562 ARBITRATION:
26. The question of the original liability of a city
on its bonds sued upon, cannot be raised in this 1. Parties in an admiralty court may submit
court, if the city made no defense when suit was

their case by rule of the court to arbitration.
brought against it in the State Court.

U. 8. v. Farragut,

879
Sacramento v. Fowle,

592 2. An award, in such case, is to be construed in
27. This court will reverse a decree in admiral- this court by the same general principles which
ty if the facts require it, although both subordi- would govern it in a court of common law or of
nate courts have concurred in a decision on its equity.
merits.

Idem,

879
Germania Ins. Co. v. The Lady Pike,

499 3. Where the award finds facts, it is conclusive:
28. New evidence may be received here on the where it finds propositions of law its mistake can

be corrected in this court.
hearing of appeals in admiralty and prize cases,

Where a proposition is
and it is the duty of this court to re-examine the

one of mixed law and fact, in which the error of
facts as well as the law of the case.

law, if there be one, cannot be distinctly shown,
Idem,

499 the parties must abide by the award.
29. Plaintiff in error cannot object that the Idem,

879
judgment was too favorable to him, and the judg.

4. Awards are also liable to be set aside in the
ment will not be reversed for that reason.

court below, for exceeding the power conferred
Tilden v. Blair,

632 by the submission, for mistake of law, for fraud.
30. This court will not reverse the decision of and for all the reasons for which awards are set

aside.
the Supreme Court of a Territory on the construc-
tion of its Code.

Idem,

879
Sweeney v. Lomme,

727
31. An objection that there is no replication,

ASSIGNEES.
which was not made in the court below, will be

SEE BANKRUPTCY, 2, 6, 10, 22, 25, 26.
considered as having been waived.

769
Fretz v. Storer,

BILLS AND NOTES, 1.
32. This court will not reverse a judgment on ASSIGNMENTS.
account of an error which clearly appears to have
produced no injury.

SEE PATENT RIGHTS, 16, 17, 19, 20.
R. R. Co. v. Pratt,

827
33. Where a bill is dismissed for misjoinder of ments upon his paying $5,000 and gave him a pow-

1. Where one assigned to another certain judg.
parties, the dismissal should be without prejudice er of attorney to dispose of the judgments for him
to another suit or should state the ground of dis-

and in his name the judgments do not pass to
missal, and if it is dismissed generally the decree such other without the payment of said sum.
will be reversed.

French v. Hay.

193
House v. Mullen,

838

2. Where judgments are collected by the assignor

and he holds the money for the assignee, the as.
APPEAL AND ERROR, PRACTICE ON. signee has a complete remedy at law for it, and a

bill in equity for it cannot be sustained.
SEE EXCEPTIONS, 1-2.

Idcm,

799
PRACTICE, passimi.

ATTACHMENTS.
1. Where there was a joint judgment against
several, and the joint interests of all are affected by

SEE BANKRUPTCY, 11.
the judgment, all must join in the writ of error un-

BANKS, 1.
less a severance of the parties in interest has been

JURISDICTION,

21.
effected by summons and severance, or by some
equivalent action eppearing in the record.
Simpson 1. Grcelli,

338 ATTORNEYS.
2. Where there is no such assignment of errors as

SEE APPEAL AND ERROR, 10.
is required by the rule, and there is not in the rec-

CONTEMPTS, 1-4.
ord any other error that should be noticed without

EVIDENCE, 36.
an assignment, the judgment will be affirmed.
Treat v. Jemison,

GOVERNMENT CLAIMS, 1-3.
449

JURISDICTION, 19, 20.
3. When the trial is by the court a bill of excep-

MANDAMUS, 1.
tions cannot be used to bring up the whole testi-

PRACTICE, 7.
mony for review.

1. The power to disbar an attorney is possessed
Ins. Co. 1'. Sea,

611
must either get the court to make a special finding ring him can be rendered, he should have notice of
4. If the parties desire a review of the law, they ball courts which have authority to admit at

torneys

But before judgment disbar.
which raises the legal propositions, or they must

the grounds of complaint against him and ample
present to the court their propositions of law and opportunity of explanation and defense.
require a ruling on them.

Er parte Robinson,

205
Idem,

611 *2. One who allowed an attorney to proceed in
5. Objectior to the admission or exclusion of evi- the Court of Claims to collect a claim and allowed
dence, or to rulings on the propositions of law, a settlement of the claim to be made by him, is
must appear by bill of exceptions. Errors mustestopped from disputing the validity of the settle.
be assigned upon such rulings.

ment.
Idem,

611
Stowe v. U. s.,

144

3 An attorney cannot be charged with negli. 13. The Bankrupt Law does not prevent an in-
gence when he accepts, as correct law, a decision of solvent from dealing with his property-selling or
the Supreme Court of the State in regard to the lia-exchanging it for other property at any time before
bility of stockholders of a corporation.

proceedings in bankruptcy are taken by or against
Marsh v. Whitmore,

482 him-provided such dealings be conducted without
4. An attorney selling on another's account can- any purpose to delay or defraud his creditors, or
not become the buyer on his own, at the sale ; but to give à preference to anyone, and does not im-
where his client has adopted such a transaction and pair the value of his estate.
given long acquiescence to it, he is concluded from Idem,

568
questioning it

14. Payments made by a debtor, while probably
Idem,

432 insolvent, but at a time when he did not anticipate

any interruption to bis business but was planning
BANKRUPTCY.

its enlargement, to a creditor who neither knew or

had reason to believe his debtor to be insolvent, are
SEE APPEAL AND ERROR, 6, 7, 8.

not void under the Bankrupt Law.
Idem,

509
APPEAL AND ERROR, PRACTICE ON, 10.
EQUITY, 3.

15. The mere entry of a judgment against an in-
INTEREST, 3.

solvent debtor, by virtue of a warrant of attorney,
JURISDICTION, 29, 31.

although entered just before the proceedings in
LANDLORD AND TENANT, 3, 5.

bankruptcy are commenced and when the creditor

knows his debtor is insolvent, and although fol.
1. Debts due to the United States are not barred lowed by an execution, is not such a preference as
by a discharge under the Bankrupt Act.

the statute avoids.
U, S. 1. Herron,

275
Idlem,

568
2. To authorize the assignee to recover money or 16. To render such a transaction unlawful, the
property under section 35 of the Bankrupt Act, he debtor must have been insolvent, or contemplating
must establish not only the act the bankrupt, of insolvency, at the time, and he must have procured
which he complains, but also that it was done to the judgment and execution with a view to give a
give a preference over other creditors, and that the preference to the judgment creditor, within four
Other party to the transaction has reasonable cause months before filing petition in bankruptcy, and
to believe that such person was insolvent.

the creditor must have had reasonable cause to bc-
Mays v. Fritton,

389 lieve that the debtor was insolvent, and that the
3. A note for goods sold and a warrant to con- judgment and execution were given in fraud of
fess judgment thereon, given by a debtor more than the provisions of the Bankrupt Act.
five months before the petition against him was Michaels v. Post,

520
filed upon which a judgment was entered two 17. When the issue to be decided is, whether a
weeks prior to such filing, and an execution, levy judgment against an insolvent was obtained with a
and sale of the debtor's property immediately fol- view to give a preference, the intention of the
lowed, is not of itself a transfer or other disposi. bankrupt is the turning point of the cause, and all
tion of his property, with a view to give a pref- the circumstances which go to show such intent
erence under the Bankrupt Act.

should be considered.
Il'atson v. Taylor,

576
Little v. Alerander,

62,
4. From such facts the execution creditor had no 18. The policy of the Bankrupt Law is, speedy as
reasonable cause to believe that the debtor was in- well as equal distribution of the bankrupt's assets
solvent, and that the proceedings were in fraud of among his creditors.
the Bankrupt Act, where the case shows affirma-

Bailey v. Glover,

636
tively that no fraud or collusion was intended.

19. The clause limiting the commencement of ac-
Idem,

570 tions by and against the assignee to two years after
5. Where the discharge of a debt is procured by the right of action accrues, applies to all judicial
misrepresentation and fraud, the discharge is void contests between the assignee and any person whose
and such debt may be made the basis of a petition interest is adverse to his.
to declare and adjudge the debtor a bank rupt.

Idem,

636
Michaels v. Post.

5720 20. But where the action is intended to obtain re-
6. Assignees of the bankrupt's estate may recov- dress against a fraud concealed by the party, or
er back money or other property paid, conveyed, which from its nature remains secreted, the bar
sold, assigned or transferred contrary to the pro- does not commence to run until the fraud is dis-
visions or in fraud of the Bankrupt Act.

covered. And this doctrine is equally as applicable
First Nat'l Bank v. Jones,

542

to suits at law as to those in equity.
Michaels v. Post,

520
Idem,

636
Fox v. Gardner,

68.1

21. In the 8th section of the Bankrupt Act, sec.
7. It is immaterial under the Bankrupt Act, 4981, R. S., the words “defeated party" should be
whether the debtor gave the preference without construed "opposite party," or "successful party,"
solicitation from the creditor, if the evidence

or "adverse party."
showed that he gave it when insolvent, and in fraud

Wood v. Bailey,

689
of the Act, to the knowledge of the creditor.

22. Where the assignee in bankruptcy voluntarily
Bank v. Jones,

542

submitted himself and his rights to the jurisdiction
8. Where the assignee in bankruptcy sues to re-

of the state court, it is too late to object in this
damages, for property of the bankrupt court to the power of the state court to render
seized and sold on execution against the bankrupt judgment.
by a creditor, the measure of damages is the value

Scott v. Kelly,

729
of the property seized and sold.
Idem,

542

23. A decree in bankruptcy, without more, will
9. Although the 35th section of the Bankrupt not, under section 11 of the Bankrupt Act, have the
Act does not specify the giving of a warrant to

effect to devest the bankrupt of the title to his real
Konfess judgment as a prohibited act, a recovery

or personal estate.

755
for such act can be had under that section.

Hampton v. Rouse,
Idem,

542

24. Prior to the assignment and conveyance au-
10. When a good title may be obtained thorized and directed by section 14 of that Act, the
against an assignee in bankruptcy under sale on

title of the estate belonging to the bankrupt, both
attachment issued from state court, of bankrupt's real and personal, remains unchanged, and such
property.

bankrupt may redeem his lands from a tax sale,
Doe v. Childress,

549 under a state statute authorizing the owner of
11. Bankruptcy proceedings do not work the dis- lands to redeem from a sale for taxes.
solution of attachments issued

Idem,
than four
more

755
months prior, but the debtor's title passes to the

25. Although section 14 of the Bankrupt Act pro-
assignee, subject to the creditor's lien acquired vides that such assignment or conveyance shall re-
by the attachment, and a judrment against the

late back to the commencement of the proceed-
property attached may be entered, although a dis-ings, the instrument of assignment cannot operate
charge has been granted, and is pleaded in bar of either retrospectively or prospectively before it is
the action.

executed.
Idem,

549
Idem,

733
12. A mere exchange of securities not made to s?. 26. The assignee of the estate of an individual
d'ure an unsecured debt, or to give any preference partner of a debtor copartnership, cannot maintain
is not void under the Bankrupt Law although made à suit to recover back money previously paid to a
within four months before the petition in bank- creditor of the copartnership. Such money can
ruptcy.

only be recovered by an assignee of the partner-
Clark 1. Iselin,
508 ship. Amsinck v. Bean,

801

-

cover

as

[ocr errors]

BANKS.

only be defeated by showing bad faith in him, and

the burden of proof lies on the assailant of the
SEE TAXES AND TAX SALES, 3-10, 23, 28.

taker's title.
TRUSTS AND TRUSTEES, 1, 2.

Hotchkiss v. Bank,

645
1. The property of a national bank, attached at 11. No action will lie upon an acceptance which
the suit of an individual creditor, after the bank was a part of an illegal contract.
has become insolvent, cannot be subjected to sale For t. Gardner,

6S
for the payment of his demand, as against the 12. Simple indulgence, given by the holder to
claim to the property, by a receiver of the bank the maker of a note. or mere delay to enforce pas.
subsequently appointed.

ment without a binding contract to give time, wil
National Bank v. Colby,

687 not, under the general rules of commercial law, dis-
2. A suit against the national bank to enforce charge an indorser.
the collection of a demand, is abated by a decree

Ross v. Jones,

730
dissolving the corporation and forfeiting the rights 13. An indorser is not a surety in the general
and franchises.

sense, nor under a statute of a State which pro-
Idem,

687 vides that a surety in any bill or note may give

the holder notice in writing to sue the principal,
BILL OF REVIEW.

and if the holder fails to do so within thirty days
1. On a bill of review in equity, nothing can be

the surety shall be discharged.

Jilem,
examined but the pleadings, proceedings and de.

730
cree, which constitute the record of the cause.

14. Treasury notes issued under the Act of Dec.
The proofs cannot be looked into as they can on

19, 1861. of Mississippi, then in insurrection, are

illegal and void and are not receivable in payment
an appeal.

764
Putnam v. Day,

of taxes.
2. On such a bill filed by a defendant to set Taylor 1. Thomas,

789
aside the decree, he is bound by the answer filed on

BONA FIDE HOLDER.
his beha by his solicit r's, although he did not
himselt read it, unless he can show mistake or To constitute a bona fide holder, it is not neces.
fraud in filing it. The answers of other defend- sary that the value should have been paid at the
ants cannot be read in his favor.

time of receiving the security. A past considera-
Idem,

704 tion is sufficient.
3. Where the defendant by his answer admits the Sawyer 1. Prickett,

105
claim to be due and prays contribution from other
defendants, without setting up any defense to the BONDS.
demand, he cannot, after a decree and on a bill of SEE ACTION, 2.
review, ask to have the decree set aside on the

APPEAL AND ERROR, 21, 22, 26.
ground of laches on the part of the complainant in

APPEAL AND ERROR, PRACTICE Ox, 7-9.
bringing suit.

BILLS AND NOTES, 4-6.
Idlem,

761

EVIDENCE, 28.
BILLS AND NOTES.

JURISDICTION, 3.

PLEADINGS, 4.
SEE CORPORATIONS, 7, 9, 10.

PRINCIPAL AND SURETY, 1-3, 5-8.
PLEDGE.

REPLEVIN, 1, 2, 5.
1. An assignee of inland bills of exchange under

STATE LAWS AND DECISIONS, 4, 6-8.

SUPERSEDEAS, 1, 4, 5.
sec. 11 of the Judiciary Act of 1789, cannot main.
tain an action thereon in the Circuit Court, unless 1. Where bonds of a county were issued in pay.
his assignor could have maintained such action if ment of the county's subscription to the capital
no assignment had been made.

stock of a railroad company, the fact that no sub-
Morgan v. Gay,

100 scription was formally made upon the books of the
2. A paper which acknowledged the amount of

company is quite immaterial.
money specified to be due to the plaintiff, and prom- Nugent v. Supervisors.

83
ised to pay him that sum, with interest, as soon as 2. Where the bonds were delivered, the county
the crop could be sold or the money could be raised accepted the position of a stockholder, received
from any other source, is not a promissory note. certificates for the stock subscribed, voted as a
Núnez v. Dautel,

161

stockholder, and proceeded to levy a tax to pay the
3. A note payable to bearer, although overdue interest falling due on the bonds, the bonds are
and dishonored, passes by delivery, subject to such valid.
equities by reason of its dishonor as may be es-

Idem,

83
tablished.

3. Bonds of a North Carolina Railroad Company,
Bank v. Teras,

295 issued in May, 1862, were not payable in Confeder-
4. The bonds and treasury notes of the United ate notes, but only in the legal currency of the
States, payable to holder or to bearer at a definite | United States.
future time, are negotiable commercial paper, and Confederate Note Case."

190
their transferability is subject to the commercial 4. The absence of the indorsement of the govern-
law of other paper of that character.

ment of the State on the bonds of Texas does not
Vermıilyet. Adams Erpress Co.,

609 raise a presumption that they were issued for a
5. Where such paper is overdue, a purchaser treasonable or unlawful purpose.
takes subject to the rights of antecedent holders, to Bank v. Teras,

295
the same extent as in other paper bought after its 5. Bonds of a city issued to a private corporation,
maturity.

to aid a manufacturing enterprise or in constructo
Idem,

600 ing and operating a foundry and machine shops,
6. No usage or custom can be proved among are void, although their issue is ratified by an Act
bankers and brokers dealing in such paper, in con- of the State Legislature.
travention of this rule of commercial law.

Bank v. lola City,

463
Idem,

600

Citizens' sav. d Loan A 880. v. Topeka, 453
7. Hence, treasury notes of the United States 6. Bonds of a railroad company promising to pay
stolen from an express company and sold for value, to bearer a certain sum a: & certain time with in-
after due, in the regular course of business, may be terest, are negotiable instruments notwithstanding
recovered of the purchaser by the express com- an agreement respecting scrip preferred stock con.
pany, which has succeeded to the right of the tained in them, that agreement being independent
original owner.

of the pecuniary obligation of the company; and
Idem,

600 the absence of the certificate of such stock original.
8. The liability of an acceptor does not arise from ly attached to the bonds when the latter were taken
merely writing his name on the bill, but commences by the defendants, was not of itself a circumstance
with the subsequent delivery to a bona fide holder, sufficient to put the defendants upon inquiry as ir
or with notice of acceptance given to such holder. the title of the holder.
Tilden v. Blair,

632
Hotchkiss t'. Bank,

vić
9. Where defendants resided in New York, and 7. Where a state law gave power to County
there wrote their acceptance upon a draft, and Courts to borrow money and issue bonds or read
then sent it to Illinois to have it negotiated there, purposes, if authorized thereto by a vote or the
the contract is an Illinois contract and draws inter people, the power conferred cannot be exercised un-
est according to the law of that State, although less the proposed expenditure is approved by the
made payable in New York.

voters. Ritchie 1. i'ranklin Co.,

825
Idem,

632 8. Where the Legislature subsequently passed a
10. The title of the person who takes negotiable curative Act, authorizing such County Courts to isa
paper before due, for valuable consideration, can sue bonds to pay for bridges and roads which had

1

[merged small][ocr errors]
[ocr errors][ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

been built, such Act is valid if not forbidden by the may allow plaintiffs in error a certiorari, and time
State Constitution.

to produce a certified copy of it.
825

727

Sueeny v. Lomme,
Idem,

CHATTEL MORTGAGES.
CAPTURED AND ABANDONED PROP-

SEE MORTGAGES, 2, 3.
ERTY.

COLLISION.
SEE CONTRACTS, 29.

SEE DAMAGES, 7.
1. One who purchased cotton from the Confeder.

QUESTIONS OF LAW AND Fact, 5.
ate States, knowing that the money he paid for it

1. Sailing vessels, when approaching a steamer,
went to sustain the rebellion, cannot in the Court

are required to keep their course and steamers,
of Claims recover the proceeds when it has been

under such circumstances, are required to keep out
captured and sold under the Captured and Aban-

of the way.
doned Property Act.

52
Freser v. The Wenona,

371
Sprott v. U. S.,

2. It is not material that signal-lights were not
2. One who gave aid and comfort to the late re-

properly located on the vessel, where they were
bellion cannot, after two years from its sunpres.

burning brightly, and were seen by the approach-
sion, maintain an action in the Court of Claims to
recover money in the Treasury arising from the ing steamer, in ample time to avoid a collision.

Idem,

52
sale of his cotton, taken possession of by the

3. A change of course of the sailing vessel when
United States, and sold under the Captured and

the collision was inevitable, is not a culpable act.
Abandoned Property Act.

98
The Mary H. Banks V. The Falcon,

738
Haycraft 2. U. S.,

4. Steamer in fault for collision with a schooner.
3. The right of action was not restored to the

where there was ample sea-room, calm weather,
disloval owner, by the President's Proclamation of
December 25, 1968, granting unconditional pardon abundant light, and no other vessel in proximity:

Ilem,

98
to all who participated in the rebellion.

5. Where the libel alleges, and the answer admits
Idem,

738

a total loss, the steamer is liable for the full value
4. No one can sue in the Court of Claims for the

of the schooner, and a decree for such value
proceeds of captured and abandoned property un.
less he can prove his ownership of the property against the steamer will bar any further claims by

the owners of the schooner, and their title will be
seized, his right to the proceeds thereof, and that

thereby remitted to the owners of the steamer.
he never gave aid or comfort to the rebellion.

Idem,
863

98
Vutt 2, U. S.,

6. Where a steamer was going at an undue rate
5. Where the agreement to sell passes no title,

of speed, and it was her fault that she came into
the vendee cannot, but the vendor can, sue in the
Court of Claims for the proceeds of the property colliding with a bark, she was held liable for the

a position from which she could not escape without
under the Captured and Abandoned Property Act.

damages.

803
Idem,

The Pennsylvania v. Troop,

148

7. The bark held in fault for violation of the
CARRIERS.

rules of navigation which required her to blow a

fog-bord, when under way.
SEE EVIDENCE, 42.

Idem,

148
1. The burden of proof lles on the carrier to 8. If it clearly appears the fault could have had
show a loss occurred through a peril of navigation. nothing to do with the disaster, the liability for
excepted in the bill of lading, and nothing short of damages is upon the ship or ships whose fault
clear proof should discharge him from duties caused the injury.
which the law has annexed to his employment.

Idem.

148
The Johler v. Home Ins. Co.,

485 9. But when a ship, at the time of the collision,
2. Carriers of merchandise by water are insurers,

is in actual violation of a statutory rule intended
and liable for every loss or damage to the merchan. to prevent collisions, it is a reasonable presurn.
dise, unless it happened by the act of God, the pub. tion that such fault, if not the sole cause, was at
lic enemy, the shipper, or by some other cause ex- least a contributory cause of the disaster.

148

Idem,
cepted in the contract of shipment.

Germania Ins. Co. v. The Lady Pike, 499 10. In such a case, the burden of showing that
3. The carrier must provide a seaworthy vessel,

her fault could not have been one of the causes of
well furnished with proper motive power; furni. the collision rests upon the ship.

Idem,
ture necessary for the voyage : a crew adequate

148
in number and competent for their duty; and a

11. Where the weather was boisterous, and it
competent and skillful master, of sound judg.

was difficult at all times for a vessel to make the
ment and discretion and of sufficient knowledge passage between piers of a bridge on a river, it
and experience.

was the duty of the master to stop until the
Dilem,

499 weather became calm; and failing in this duty, the
4. The responsibility of a common carrier may be

vessel is liable for loss of the cargo by collision of
limited by an express agreement made with his tbe vessel with the pier.
employer at the time of his accepting goods for

The Mohler v. Home Ins. Co.,

483)

12. The defense of inevitable accident can never
transportation, provided the limitation be such as
the law can recognize as reasonable and not incon- be sustained even in a collision case, unless it ap-
sistent with sound public policy.

pears that neither party was in fault; nor where
Erpress Co. v. Caldwell,

556

the disaster was occasioned by the incompetency or
5. An agreement that in case of failure by the negligence of the master or pilot in charge of the
carrier to deliver goods, a claim shall be made by

deck.
the bailor, or by the consignee, within a specified

Germania Ins. Co. v. The Lady Pike, 499
period, or the liability of the carrier shall cease, is
not against the policy of the law, and is valid ir CONFEDERACY.
that period be a reasonable one.
1lem,

556

SEE BILLS AND NOTES, 14.
6. It is the duty of the carrier to furnish suitable

Boxps, 3, 4.
vehicles for transportation, and if he furnishes un.

CAPTURED AND ABANDONED PROPERTY, 1-4. .
fit or unsafe rehicles he is not exempted from re.

CONFISCATION, passim.
sponsibility by the fact that the shipper knew them

WAR, passim.
to be defective and used them,

1. The Acts of the States in rebellion, in the or.
R. R. Co. v. Pratt,

827 dinary course of administration of law, must be

upheld in the interest of civil society, to which
CERTIORARI.

such a government was necessary.
Sprott v. U. S.,

371
1. A certiorari is designed to bring up some part Confederate Government can give no validity to

2. But the statutes, decrees or authority of the
of the record not included in the transcript.
Baring v. Dabney,

90
any act done in its service or in aid of its purpose.

371

Idem,
2. It is not a proper remedy for the neglector
the clerk to append his certificate to the transcript: CONFISCATION.

90
3. When it appears for the first time on the ar- 1. Confiscation proceedings cannot be used to
gument of a cause, that the judgment appealed from pass a title to one who paid nothing for it.
is not in the record, the court of its own motion

Monger v. Shirley,

889

[ocr errors]

Idem,

« ForrigeFortsett »