« ForrigeFortsett »
7. A decision establishing the existence of an irrevocable contract of exemption or limitation of taxation for the term of the charter of a corporation is not res judicata as to such exemption after that charter is renewed. Third Nat. Bank v. Stone, 1035 Louisville v. Citizens' Nat. Bank,
11. The jurisdiction of a state court is open to inquiry in a Federal court sitting in the same state, when the judgment of the state court comes under consideration therein. Cooper v. Newell,
See also EVIDENCE, 17, 22; PRIZE, 6.
of its general manager in writing a personal 1. A gas company is not liable for the act letter, which he copied into the official copybook in the company's office, and which was used as the basis of a libelous publication respecting the testimony of the former manager of the company as to the price of gas. Washington Gaslight Co. v. Lansden, 543 2. The writer of a letter which is used as the basis of a libel and is written for that purpose cannot escape liability therefor because of the fact that other matters, not contained in his letter, are included in the same article as published.
See APPEAL AND ERROR, 32; CLAIMS, 2;
LIMITATION OF ACTIONS.
See EVIDENCE, 1-6.
On Appeal, see APPEAL AND ERROR.
1. The cumulative disability of an heir of a woman who died during coverture cannot arrest the running of the statute of limitations. Davis v. Coblens, 1147
2. A delay of nine years and four months is not fatal to a suit to annul a foreclosure on the ground of fraud, where the plaintiff is an ignorant colored woman, defrauded by one in whom she placed entire confidence, who assumed to act as her agent and pro
See CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, 10, 27; fessed that the sale was in her interest, and TRIAL, 1-5.
JUSTICE OF THE PEACE.
See APPEAL AND ERROR, 2; TRIAL, 2-4.
LANDLORD AND TENANT.
See also SET-OFF.
1. The mere payment of rent under a lease by a city of batture, which is subject to a suspensive condition, does not change the nature of the condition or work an estoppel. New Orleans v. Texas & P. R. Co.
who obtained title for little more than a nominal sum by the false personation of a fictitious person, when he still controls and probably owns the property, the situation of which has not materially changed, and there has been no rapid rise in value or the intervention of the rights of any bona fide purchaser. McIntire v. Pryor, 606
The pendency of a foreclosure suit in 178 a Federal court, in which the decree saves the rights secured by a prior mortgage, does not interfere with the negotiation of bonds
2. A lease by a city of batture to a railroad company in order to permit the exten
secured by such prior mortgage, or impair in any degree the lien thereby created. Pittsburgh, C. C. & St. L. R. Co. v. Long Island Loan & T. Co.
See COMMERCE, 18; CONSPIRACY, 2.
See STATUTES, 1.
See CONFISCATION, 1, 2; WATERS, 6.
The execution by a public officer of a contract cannot be compelled by mandamus, when the other party has not executed a bond which is required by statute before the contract shall be binding. Nugent v. Arizona Improv. Co. 721
See also APPEAL AND ERROR, 76.
5. Ex turpi causa non oritur actio. McMullen v. Hoffman, 1117
6. Potior est conditio defendentis. Id. 7. Sic utere tuo ut alienum non lædas. Orient Ins. Co. v. Daggs,
1. Damnum absque injuria. Meyer v. Richmond,
374 2. Ex dolo malo non oritur actio. Pullman's Palace Car Co. v. Central Transp.
5. Every vein the top or apex of which lies inside the surface lines of a lode mining See APPEAL AND ERROR, 15; REWARD, 1, claim extended downward vertically belongs
to the locator, and may be pursued by him
3. The end lines of a mining claim under the act of 1866 must be the end lines of all the veins found within the surface boundaries, which are given to the locator by the act of 1872. Id.
4. The only exception to the rule that the
6. The right to follow a vein on the dip is limited by the end lines of the claim, in case of a patent under the act of 1866 as well as in case of a location under the act of 1872. Walrath v. Champion Min. Co. 170
7. The conditions upon which extralateral rights may be acquired by locators of mining claims having been prescribed by those conditions, or else be limited to the Congress, a party must bring himself within mineral beneath the surface of his territory. Del Monte Min. & M. Co. v. Last Chance Min. & M. Co. 72
McMullen v. Hoffman,
3. Ex pacto illicito non oritur actio. McMullen v. Hoffman, 1117 4. Expressio unius est exclusio alterius. Walla Walla v. Walla Walla Water Co. 341
8. The right to follow a vein on its dip beyond the vertical side line of the location is not limited to cases in which the apex of
the vein crosses both end lines,but extends to | NATIONAL BANKS.
See BANKS, 1-7; EQUITY, 2; TAXES, 8-12.
See DUTIES, 8.
9. A compromise of a dispute as to a mining claim, whereby an action to deter- NATURAL GAS. mine the right thereto is dismissed, in consideration of an interest in the ground when thereafter patented by the applicant, is not invalid, in the absence of any statutory prohibition. St. Louis, M. & M. Co. v. Montana M. Co.
See PRIVATE LAND CLAIMS, 8.
MONEY IN COURT.
See APPEAL AND ERROR, 10.
See APPEAL AND ERROR, 55.
See also EVIDENCE, 5; INTERVENTION. 1. A mortgage of domestic animals covers their increase, although it is silent as to them. Northwestern Nat. Bank v. Freeman, 307
2. A chattel mortgage of a given number of articles out of a larger number may be valid as against those who know the facts. Id.
3. The record of a chattel mortgage to other mortgagees is not notice to an assignee of a subsequent mortgage, but he is chargeable with notice of the record of a prior mortgage on the same property by the same mortgagor to his assignor.
See ATTORNEYS; CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, 10, 21; CONTRACTS, 1, 11-13; COURTS, 12, 14; EMINENT DOMAIN, 1; EQUITY, 4; ESTOPPEL; LANDLORD AND TENANT; LIS PENDENS; STATUTES, 1, 6; TAXES, 4, 6; TRIAL, 5; WATERS, 11, 12. MURDER.
See also CRIMINAL LAW, 2.
1. A limitation of municipal indebtedness is not violated by a contract for a supply of water or gas at an annual rental, merely because the aggregate of the rentals during the life of the contract may exceed the limit of indebtedness. Walla Walla v. Walla Walla Water Co.
See DAMAGES, 5; DAMS; EVIDENCE, 6.
Habeas corpus; power of Federal courts to issue; in what cases; when discharge granted; review of decisions; contempt proceedings.
Highways. See STREET RAILWAYS. Municipal corporations; power to
impose restraints or conditions upon street railways. Street railways; right of, in the streets; grant to, by municipal corporations; power of such corporations to impose restraints or conditions upon street railways; consents by abutting owners; forfeiture of rights. Umpire. See ARBITRATION. NOTICE.
See CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, 24, 30; INDIANS, 2; TAXES, 17.
2. A statute requiring a municipality to pay claims which a special tribunal finds to be equitably due and based on a moral obligation is within the general legislative power of a territory which, by an act of OLEOMARGARINE.
See PUBLIC LANDS, 5.
Congress, extends to all rightful subjects of See COMMERCE, 3, 5, 8; FOOD. legislation not inconsistent with the Constitution and laws of the United States. Guthrie Nat. Bank v. Guthrie,
1. A cross bill is properly allowed to be filed for the return of property delivered under an illegal lease, where the complainant has alleged an election to terminate the lease, and also alleged its invalidity and of fered to do what the court should decree to be just. Pullman's Palace Car Co. v. Central Transp. Co. 108 2. An averment that the establishment by a city of competing waterworks would injure the value of the property of a water company, and deprive it of rentals which the city had agreed to pay, need not specifically state how such damage would be done. Walla Walla v. Walla Walla Water Co. 341
See also ACTION OR SUIT, 2.
1. A pledge is discharged by the voluntary parting with possession of the property. Hubbard v. Tod,
the postoffice department by dropping it into a letter box. Scott v. United States, 471
See CLOUD ON TITLE, 2; EMINENT DoMAIN, 2; WATERS, 6, 7, 8; WHARVES, 1.
See ACTIONS; CONFLICT OF LAWS; EJECTMENT; EVIDENCE; JUDGMENT; MANDAMUS; PLEADING; TRIAL; WITNESSES; WRIT AND PROCESS.
PREFERENCES. See BANKS, 11.
See EVIDENCE, 7-11, 19; PUBLIC LANDS, 4.
PRINCIPAL AND AGENT.
See also CORPORATIONS, 2, 3; LIBEL, 1; TRIAL, 8.
One who acquires title through an agent is chargeable with the latter's fraud in the transaction. McIntire v. Pryor, 606
PRIVATE LAND CLAIMS.
See also EVIDENCE, 11.
1. In an investigation of a Mexican land title, the court of private land claims is not limited to the dry, technical rules of a court of law, but may inquire and establish that which equitably was the land granted by the government of Mexico. Ely v. United States,
2. A Mexican grant should not be sustained by the court of private land claims for more than the amount purchased, petitioned, and paid for, when all the proceedings contemplate a sale of that quantity only. United States v. Maish, 150
3. Sustaining the validity of a Mexican grant to the extent of the land paid for is but carrying out the spirit of the treaty, the obligations of international justice, and the duties imposed by the act creating the court of private land claims, where the grant was of a specified quantity of land, in a certain place, at a certain price per sitio. Ely v. United States,
Camou v. United States,
4. The mere fact that a Mexican land grant is narrower than the limits of the outboundaries does not prevent the court of private land claims, through the aid of a commissioner, surveyor, or master, from determining exactly what did equitably pass under the grant. Ely v. United States,
2. A secret equity in securities pledged by a person who had been empowered to do so by a corporation cannot be set up by it as against the pledgee.
See COMMERCE, 14.
See also BANKS, 9; INDICTMENT, 2.
The fact that a letter stolen from the mails was a decoy addressed to a fictitious person is not a defense to an indictment under U. S. Rev. Stat. § 5467, when the letter had been delivered into the jurisdiction of
5. The several states in Mexico had in 1833 authority to make sales of vacant public lands within their limits which must be recognized by this government under the treaty of 1853. Camou v. United States,
Perrin v. United States,
6. The power of an intendant to convey public lands was recognized by the govern
port as to constitute a flagrant disregard of her duty to shun it. The Olinde Rodrigues, 1065
5. A claimant who moves on the captor's proofs only for the discharge and restitution of a vessel seized as prize cannot, on the denial of his motion, demand as matter of right that the cause be opened again to allow him to make proofs. Id.
See BILLS AND NOTES.
10. The decree of Santa Anna on November 25, 1853, while he was temporary dictator and shortly before the Gadsden treaty PROMISSORY NOTES. was made with him by the United States, whereby he declares that alienations of public lands by the several states without approval of the general government are null, will not preclude the recognition of such a claim which had become a vested right at the time of his decree, when the grantee was never disturbed in his possession, nor any adjudication made of the nullity of his grant on account of such decree. Camou v. United States,
Perrin v. United States,
2. The capture of a vessel while dismantled and lying by the bank of a river when made by the naval forces of the United States, although under the general control of the War Department is not deemed to have been made by the Army instead of the Navy. Oakes v. United States, 1169 3. A vessel purchased by the confederate government from an agent of the owner although without the owner's authority, consent, or knowledge, is not when captured by the United States within the provisions of the act of Congress of March 3, 1800, providing for the restoration to the owners of private vessels recaptured from the enemy as there can be no recapture where there has been no capture. Id.
6. A libel alleging that the seizure of a vessel "was made for the reason that said steamer was used by and with the knowledge and consent of the owner in aiding the present rebellion against the United States contrary to the act of August 6, 1861," sufficiently alleges that she was so used with the knowledge and consent of her owner as well as that she was seized for that reason. Oakes v. United States,
See WRIT AND PROCESS.
See CLAIMS, 8.
See CONFISCATION, 1, 2; WATERS, 6. PUBLIC CONTRACT.
See CONTRACTS, 2-5, 10-12.
See also CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, 29,
See also BLOCKADE, 3; EVIDENCE, 19, 20.
1. The exaction from the owner of private property of the cost of a public im
1. Probable cause for the seizure of a ves-provement in substantial excess of the spesel as prize exists when there are circum-cial benefits accruing to him is, to the extent stances sufficient to warrant suspicion, of such excess, a taking, under the guise of though they may not prove sufficient to war- taxation, of private property for public use rant condemnation. The Olinde Rodrigues, without compensation. Norwood v. Baker, 1065
4. Restitution of a vessel seized as prize| for attempting to break a blockade may be made without damages and subject to payment of costs and expenses when there was probable cause to seize the vessel, and after 1. A patent for public lands granted unwarning she had approached so near the der a mistaken notion of the law and withU. S.,
See also APPEAL AND ERROR, 35, 36;