because filed too late.-Bartley V. Robinson,

APPLIANCES. 161 S. W. 386.

See Master and Servant, 88 101-129, 265. 81133 (Tex.Civ.App.) In the absence of a statement of fact, bills of exception, and motion for new trial, a judgment will be affirmed,

APPROPRIATION. unless fundamental error appears on the face See States, & 137; Statutes, $ 5. of the record proper.- National Aëroplane Co. v. McCormick, 161 S. W. 375.

ARBITRATION AND AWARD. $ 1140 (Tex.Civ.App.) Where verdict for de: See Partition, $ 22; Reference; Specific Per fendant on plea of réconvention showed that jury allowed part of a claim which should not

formance, $ 80. have been submitted, held, that the judgment

I. SUBMISSION. would be reversed unless the entire amount of such claim was remitted.-Gillispie v. Ambrose, tration of the rights of distributees to lands

$ 16 (Mo.) A statutory submission to arbi. 161 S. W. 937.

acquired from their ancestor was revoked by (D) Reversal.

the bringing of suit by one of the parties for $1170 (Mo.App.) A new trial should not be trators.--Ferrell v. Ferrell, 161 S. W. 719.

partition, before actual submission to the arbi. granted to defendant in an action for libel in charging perjury because the verdict for plain

ARGUMENT OF COUNSEL. tiff only found exemplary damages for him, without mentioning actual damages, in view See Appeal and Error, $ 766; Criminal Law, of Rev. St. 1909, $ 1850, requiring the court to 88 711-730; Trial, 8 106. disregard defects not affecting the substantial rights of the parties.-Roney v. Organ, 161

ARREST. S. W. 868.

See Municipal Corporations, $ 745. $ 1170 (Tex.Civ.App.) A charge correct in law, which directed a verdict for the defendant

ARSON, on the finding of certain facts, held not ground for reversal, though the defense could be sus- 8 25 (Mo.) In a prosecution for burning intained by a finding of fewer facts than were sured property, in violation of Rev. St. 1909. § embraced in the hypothesis.-St. Louis South-4509, it is not necessary to prove that the inwestern Ry. Co. of Texas v. Martin, 161 S. W. surer of the property is a corporation.-State 405.

v. Ruckman, 161 S. W. 705. $ 1171 (Tex.Civ.App.) Where the jury did not 8 37 (Mo.) In a prosecution for arson in the follow erroneous instructions as to the measure third degree, evidence held insufficient to susof damages, and it did not appear what evi- tain a conviction.-State v. Ruckman, 161 S. dence they considered in arriving at an exces

W. 705. sive verdict, such verdict will be reversed.- Evidence of motive uncorroborated by inLouisiana Rio Grande Canal Co. v. Quinn, 161 criminatory facts and circumstances is insuf. S. W. 375.

ficient to establish a prima facie case of guilty.

-Id. § 1172 (Tex.Civ. App.) Under rule 62a for Courts of Civil Appeals (149 S. E. x), the ap

ARTICLES. pellate court may, in an action by a woman to set aside her former husband's deeds to their See Corporations, $ 18. community property, reverse only that part of the judgment which erroneously granted par

ASSAULT AND BATTERY. tition without evidence of value.-Gutheridge v. Gutheridge, 161 S. W. 892.

See Homicide, $_292; Mayhem; Municipal

Corporations, § 745 ; Rape, & 66. $ 1175 (Ark.) In an action against a telegraph company, where it was only liable for

I. CIVIL LIABILITY. nominal damages, the case will be reversed and judgment for nominal damages entered.-Ful-(A) Acts Constituting Assault or Battery kerson v. Western Union Telegraph Co., 161

and Liability Therefor. S. W. 168.

§ 2 (Ky.) An assault is an attempt with force $ 1178 (Ark.) Where a suit in equity was not

or violence to do a corporal hurt to another; tried on the proper theory, it could be sent while a battery is an unlawful touching of the back for further proof and for reference to a person of another by the aggressor himself.master if that course was found necessary.- Hixson v. Slocum, 161 S. W. 522. Bank of Des Arc v. Moody, 161 S. W. 134. § 12 (Ky.) Plaintiff who attempted to compel

defendant to leave the sidewalk where he had (F) Mandate and Proceedings in Lower a right to be, attempting to use force therefor,

is the aggressor in the assault, though defend. $ 1207 (Ark.) On affirmance in part and re: Hixson v. Slocum, 161 S. W. 522.

ant applied profane epithets towards him.versal in part of a decree of 'a chancery court relating to homestead rights and a remand with

(B) Actions, direction to enter a decree in accordance with the opinion, held, that a subsequent decree dis

$ 35 (Mo.App.) Evidence, in an action for posing of land not in controversy and not dis- damages for an assault, held to sustain a verposed of by the former decree was in excess of diet for plaintiff.-Marts v. Powell, 161 S. W.

871. the mandate, and to that extent would be reversed.-Felton v. Brown, 161 S. W. 191.


(B) Prosecution and Punishment. UNDERTAKINGS.

$ 74 (Mo.App.) Information for assault held $ 1241 (Mo.App.) Where defendants gave an

not defective as charging that accused struck, appeal bond in favor of a corporate plaintiff, beat, and wounded himself or as failing to show they cannot after affirmance, raise the issue of whom he struck, beat, or wounded.-State v. the corporate existence of plaintiff in an action Schomers, 161 S. w. 1177. on the bond, for that matter could have been $ 77 (Mo. App.) An information for common raised in the original action, and that judgment assault may be good without averments as to is conclusive.--Iroquois Mfg. Co. v. Annan-Burg striking, beating, or wounding.-State v. SchoMilling Co., 161 S. W. 320.

mers, 161 S. W. 1177.


[ocr errors]



that the third person's indicia of ownership

should have been continuous.-Id. See Municipal Corporations, 88 408–586; Tax- An instruction held not so framed as to enation, 88 301, 463.

able the jury to apply the law to the proof of

a voluntary conveyance of defendant's goods, ASSETS.

by the aid of the third person, to his wife.-Id. See Marshaling Assets and Securities.

See Appeal and Error, $8_281, 302, 361, 499, ATTORNEY AND CLIENT.
690, 719-748; Criminal Law, 1130.

See Contempt, & 10; Continuance, & 12; Dis-

trict and Prosecuting Attorneys; New Trial,

$ 32; Partition, $ 114; Trial, g 106. See Chattel Mortgages, $$ 204, 225; Limitation of Actions, § 49; Mines and Minerals, $ 64;



(A) Fees and Other Remuneration. ASSIGNMENTS FOR BENEFIT OF

$ 135 (Mo.App.) Where an attorney renders CREDITORS.

valuable services which are accepted by his

client, there is an implied agreement to pay See Bankruptcy.

therefor.—Connor Realty Co. St. Louis

Union Trust Co., 161 S. W. 865.

(B) Lien. See Money Lent; Work and Labor.

8 189 (Ky.) A judgment for a client, which

has been reversed on appeal, has no effect to ASSUMPTION.

limit his right to settle the controversy with See Mortgages, 88 280-292.

his opponent, irrespective of his contract with Of risk, see Carriers, $ 298; Master and Serv- the recovery.-McCormack v. Louisville & N. R.

his attorney for a fee based on the amount of ant, 88203-226.

Co., 161 S. W. 518.

$ 190 (Ky.) Where defendant in a personal

injury action compromised directly with plainSee Justices of the Peace, § 173; Malicious tiff, its liability to an attorney who had a conProsecution, 88 55, 71; Sequestration. tract with plaintiff for a contingent fee on the

percentage basis must be measured by treating III. PROCEEDINGS TO PROCURE. the sum paid to plaintiff as the entire recov(B) Afldavits.

ery, and not merely the percentage to which $ 119 (Tex.Civ.App.) Where the affidavit and & N. R. Co., 161 S. W. 518.

plaintiff was entitled.-McCormack v. Louisville bond for attachment were sufficient, the fact that the petition was subject to general demur

AUTHORITY. rer will not render the attachment void.-Baker v. Hahn, 161 S. W. 443.

See Justices of the Peace, $$ 36–45; Levees, 88 g 122 (Tex.Civ.App.) Where the affidavit and 7, 34; Principal and Agent, &$ 103, 123. bond for attachment were sufficient, the petition, though subject to general demurrer, may

AUTOMOBILES. be amended without suing out a new, writ of See Estoppel, $ 119; Licenses. $$ 6, 7: Master attachment.–Baker v. Hahn, 161 S. W. 443.

and Servant, $$ 107, 247, 258, 285, 289; NegVI. PROCEEDINGS TO SUPPORT OR

ligence, ß 134; Railroads, 88 333, 348; StatENFORCE.

utes, § 79. $211 (Tex.Civ.App.) Where an action against

BAIL. a non resident is commenced by attachment, a default judgment on a petition, not stating a

II. IN CRIMINAL PROSECUTIONS. cause of action, will not warrant a foreclosure

$ 68 (Tex.Cr.App.) A recognizance on appeal, of the attachment.-Baker v. Hahn, 161 S. W. failing to provide that the appellant would 443.

abide the judgment of the Court of Criminal VIII. CLAIMS BY THIRD PERSONS. Matula v. State, 161 S. W. 965.

Appeals "in this case,” is fatally defective.$ 302 (Mo.App.) An interplea filed by a claim

$ 68 (Tex.Cr.App.) Under Code Cr. Proc. ant of the property levied on in attachment is 1911, art. 919, a recognizance, omitting the a separate suit, wherein the interpleader is concluding words "in this case, is insufficient plaintiff, while plaintiff in the main action is to confer jurisdiction upon the Court of Crimdefendant.- Keet-Rountree Dry Goods Co. v. inal Appeals of an appeal in a misdemeanor Hodges, 161 S. W. 862.

case.-Darnell v. State, 161 S. W. 971. 8 308 (Mo.App.) One claiming the ownership of property levied on in attachment issued

BAILMENT. against defendant in possession has the burden to show title.- Keet-Rountree Dry Goods Co. See Pledges; Warehousemen. v. Hodges, 161 S. W. 862.

8 12 (Mo.App.) Bailee of a deed without reA defendant in possession of personalty ward held bound to exercise ordinary care levied on in attachment may not, where a third thereof, and, in action to recover expenses of person interpleads, introduce evidence to sup- litigation necessitated by his destruction thereport the third person's claim.-Id.

of and procurement of a deed to a third person, $311 (Mo.App.) An instruction, on a trial of instructions to find for him unless he acted an interplea filed by a third person claiming fraudulently and in bad faith were sufficiently goods levied on in attachment issued against liberal.-Sails v. Funk, 161 S. W. 1175. defendant, held misleading.-Keet-Rountree Dry § 29 (Mo. App.) In an action to recover the Goods Co. v. Hodges, 161 S. W. 862.

expenses of a suit to quiet title from one whose An instruction should have added the element I destruction of a deed made it necessary, plain

For cases in Dec. Dig. & Am. Dig. Key No. Series & Indexes see same topic and section (8) NUMBER

tiff's wife who, though she had an interest in fer time, whatever may be his motive.-Murray the property, paid no part of such expenses, v.

: Walker, 161 S. W. 512. held neither a necessary nor a proper party. In a proceeding by an alleged stockholder of Sails v. Funk, 161 S. W. 1175.

a national bank to compel an examination of

the bank's stock books, evidence that plaintiff BANKRUPTCY.

was not a stockholder in good faith or at all

held admissible.-Id. III. ASSIGNMENT, ADMINISTRATION, § 253 (Ky.) The directors of a national bank AND DISTRIBUTION OF BANK are regarded as trustees for the stockholders, RUPT'S ESTATE.

and the strictest performance of their duties as (C) Preferences and Transfers by Bank- such is required.–First Nat. Bank v. Doherty, rupt, and Attachments and

161 S. W. 211. Other Liens.

BAR. $ 192 (Tenn.) Relative to the question of certain creditors of a bankrupt contractor being See Limitation of Actions. entitled to priority as having filed notices of lien within 30 days of completion of a building,

BEQUESTS. the bankrupt's trustee is bound by the agreement of the contractor and building owner in See Wills. extending time for the completion.-Harrison v. Knafil, 161 S. W. 1003.


See Criminal Law, $$ 400, 403; Evidence,

168, 185. See Appeal and Error, $ 907; Forgery, $ 29; Frauds, Statute of, &$ 23, 26, 158; Garnish

BIAS. ment, 108: Guaranty, $&' 36, 70, 77-90; See Jury, 88 99, 107. Judgment, 251 ; Novation, g 5; Principal and Surety, 88 14, 46.


See Counties, $ 116.
(C) Stockholders.

BIGAMY. § 47 (Ark.) Stockholder of bank held entitled See Jury, $ 99; Witnesses, $$ 193, 268. to have the liability of other stockholders on their subscriptions enforced, and the directors 88 (Tex.Cr.App.) In a prosecution for bighad no right to cancel the notes for the stock amy, the fact that a child was born to the first subscriptions.-Bank of Des Arc v. Moody, 161 alleged wife held inadmissible, as it would have S. W. 134.

no tendency to show that defendant was the

person who, under another name, had married (D) Offcers and Agents.

her at a certain place.-Harris v. State, 161 S. $ 54 (Ark.) Directors of bank negligently per- W. 125. mitting the cashier to make bad loans resulting

BILL OF LADING. in the insolvency of the bank held liable to the stockholders for their negligence.-Bank of Des See Alteration of Instruments, & 8; Carriers, Arc y. Moody, 161 S. W. 134.

88 55, 59, 69. Director of bank who was never notified of his election and never acted as such held not li

BILLS AND NOTES. able to stockholders for his failure to prevent the cashier from making bad loans.-Id.

See Account, Action on, $4; Appeal and Er

ror, § 842; Banks and Banking, $$ 109, 116; III. FUNCTIONS AND DEALINGS. Cancellation of Instruments; Carriers, $$ 55, (B) Representation of Bank by Officers 57, 59; Corporations, $ 327; Costs, $ 32, and Agents.

Husband and Wife, & 156; Judgment, & 713; § 105 (Mo.App.) In view of Rev. St. 1909, §

Justices of the Peace, $ 44; Limitation of Ac1112, one who had not been removed as cashier

tions, 88_49, 105, 123; Malicious Prosecution, though he is principally occupied with other

$8 58, 67; Novation, $ 5; Pleading, 88 257, business in another city, is authorized to bind

355; Principal and Surety, 88 14, 46, 104, the bank.-Citizens' Bank of Senath v. Doug

108, 162; Sales, $$ 347, 359; Set-Off and lass, 161 S. W. 601.

Counterclaim, $8 28, 33; Subrogation, $ 4;

Trial, $ 252; Usury, 88 2, 48, 80. $ 109 (Mo.App.) The cashier of a bank has prima facie authority to extend the time for payment of negotiable paper, this being partic

I. REQUISITES AND VALIDITY. ularly true where he has virtual control of the (B) Form and Contents of Promissory bank's entire business.-Citizens' Bank of Sen

Notes and Duebills. ath v. Douglass, 161 S. W. 601.

8 49 (Mo.App.) Persons signing for accommo$116 (Mo.App.) Where the cashier of a bank dation, but as joint makers, are persons pri in his private capacity learned that payment of marily liable to pay the note within Negotiable a note given by defendants had been assumed Instruments Law.-Citizens' Bank of Senath v. by third persons, and he later extended the Douglass, 161 S. W. 601. time of payment of the note, the bank_was chargeable with his knowledge.--Citizens' Bank

(E) Consideration. of Senath v. Douglass, 161 S. W. 601.

894 (Tex.Civ.App.) A previous debt, though

barred by limitation, was a sufficient consid. (C) Deposits.

eration for the execution of a new note to the 8 154 (Ark.) A depositor has a right of action extent that it was given for such recover the amount of a deposit in a bank, if Helmke v. Uecker, 161 S. W. 17. payment thereof is refused.-Bank of Des Arc v. Moody, 161 S. W. 134.


8 102 (Mo. App.) Where defendant signed a

note without taking any precautions to ascer$ 246 (Ky.) A stockholder in a national bank tain its terms, he is not entitled to cancellation held to have the absolute right under Rev. St. on the ground of mistake because the terms were U. S. § 5210 (U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 3498), not as he thought they should be.-Avery Co. v. to examine the list of stockholders at any prop- | Powell, 161 S. W. 335.


V. RIGHTS AND LIABILITIES ON IN- | tiff's agent.-Avery Co. v. Powell, 161 S. W. DORSEMENT OR TRANSFER.

335. (A) Indorsement Before Delivery to

8 520 (Tex.Civ.App.) In an action on vendor's Transfer by Payee.

lien notes, evidence held to show that the notes $ 237 (Mo.) An accommodation indorser is a the payee to the maker instead of that the con

by mistake recited that the conveyance was from surety, and equally bound with the maker to pay the note when it became due.-Havlin v.

veyance was from a third person to the maker.Continental Nat. Bank of St. Louis, 161 S. w: Brown v. Bay City Bank & Trust Co., 161 S.

W. 23. 741. An accommodation indorser of a note war

$ 537 (Mo. App.) Where, in an action by an rants that, if the note is dishonored, he will, indorsee of a note, defendant introduced proof upon notice thereof, pay the same.-Id.

that the execution of the note was induced by

fraud, and plaintiff offered uncontradicted evi. (D) Bona Fide Purchasers.

dence that he was a holder in due course, the

issue whether he was such holder was for the 8 352 (Mo.App.) Under Negotiable Instruments Law, a wife who received a note from jury.-Hill v. Dillon, 161 S. W. 881. her husband as a gift was not a bona fide purchaser.-Greer v. Orchard, 161 S. W. 875.


See Adjoining Landowners, 8 &

$ 397 (Mo.) Where a note, payable to a bank
and at the bank, was owned by the bank at ma- See Schools and School Districts, $ 97.
turity, presentment and demand were not nec-
essary.-Havlin v. Continental Nat. Bank of

BOARD OF HEALTH. St. Louis, 161 S. W. 741.

See Physicians and Surgeons, § 11. VII. PAYMENT AND DISCHARGE. $ 429 (Tex.Civ.App.) A note for $200, execut

BONA FIDE PURCHASERS. ed by plaintiff to defendant, was satisfied and see Bills and Notes, &$ 352, 537; Vendor and discharged if plaintiff afterwards presented to

Purchaser, 88 229-243. defendant a bill for $200 for services in satisfaction of the note, and requested that the note be returned, and defendant impliedly ac

BONDS. quiesced in such means of payment.--Autrey v.

See Appeal and Error, $$ 395, 1043, 1241; Collins, 161 S. W. 413.

Bail; Elections, $ 65; Evidence, $ 83; Ha$ 434 (Mo.) Payment of a note by an accom- beas Corpus, 88 3, 113; Justices of the Peace, modation indorser, after dishonor by the mak- $ 159; Levees, $ 34 ; Mandamus, & 57; Priner, was not a voluntary payment.-Havlin v. cipal and Surety; Schools and School DisContinental Nat. Bank of St. Louis, 161 S. W. tricts, § 97. 741.

BOOMS. VIII. AOTIONS. $ 462 (Tex.Civ.App.) A petition in an action See Navigable Waters, 88 21, 26. on a note held not to state a cause of action.Baker v. Hahn, 161 S. W. 443.

BOUNDARIES. $ 485 (Mo.App.) Under Rev. St. 1909, $ 1985, See Partition, $ 9; Pleading, $ 129; Trial, 88 the execution of a note alleged to have been

243, 253. procured by fraud is admitted, and the fraud cannot be relied upon unless the answer setting II. EVIDENCE, ASCERTAINMENT, AND it up be verified.-Avery Co. v. Powell, 161 S.

ESTABLISHMENT. W. 335. $ 489 (Ky.) Where, after reference to commis- fendant's fence was 12 feet too far north, or

8 37 (Mo.) Evidence held not to show that deşioner, and report and motion by plaintiff for that the boundary was as claimed by plaintiff. judgment, defendant, who admitted the execu- Clark v. McAtee, 161 S. W. 698. tion of the note sued on, and who offered no

$ 37 (Tex.Civ.App.) In an action for cutting evidence, filed an amended answer, held that plaintiff would have been entitled to judgment and removing timber from land, evidence on the even if such answer bad not been stricken for issue of boundaries held to show that the timwant of verification.–Taulbee v. Lewis & Cham- ber was cut and removed from a tract of plainbers, 161 S. W. 1100.

tiff.--Kirby Lumber Co. v. Stewart, 161 S. W.

372. $ 497 (Mo.App.) Under Negotiable Instrument Law (Rev. st. 1909, 88 10022, 10025, and ty in a call for a boundary arises because the

$ 40 (Tex.Civ.App.) Where a latent ambigui10029), in a suit on a note by an indorsee on proof shows that a line run in accordance with proof that the title of the payee was defective the call will not reach the corner called for, the because the instrument was obtained by fraud, manner of ascertaining the true corner is for the burden shifts to the plaintiff to prove that the jury.- Kirby Lumber Co. v. Stewart, 161 S. he acquired title as a holder in due course. - W. 372. Hill v. Dillon, 161 S. W. 881.

Mere want or failure of consideration for a $ 41 (Ark.) An instruction on the issue of note sued on by an indorsee, not coupled with agreed boundary line held proper.-Turquett v. Degotiation in breach of faith, or under such McMurrain, 161 S. W. 175. circumstances as to amount to a fraud, does not constitute defective title so as to change the

BREACH. burden of proof of bona fide holder under Rev. St. 1909, $ 10029.-Id.

See Sales, $8 161-181, 279, 284, 428–446. $ 499 (Mo.App.) A defendant pleading payment of a note has the burden of proof.-Win

BREACH OF THE PEACE. frey v. Matthews, 161 S. W. 583.

See Municipal Corporations, 8 663. $ 520 (Mo. App.) In a suit against the guarantor of a note, where he set up fraud in the

BRIDGES. procurement of his guaranty, evidence held insufficient to show any fraud on the part of plain- I See Railroads, $$ 99, 411.

For cases in Dec. Dig. & Am. Dig. Key No. Series & Indexes see same topic and section (3) NUMBER


$ 42 (Tex.Cr.App.) Two saloons having been

raided at the same time, evidence that defendant See Appeal and Error, 88 742, 758–773, 879; had some whisky shortly after, and that he said Criminal Law, 8 1130.

it came from the raid, is insufficient to convict

him of burglary of one of the places, though BROKERS.

whisky of that kind was in such saloon.-Jobe See Appeal and Error, $ 671; Evidence, 88 168, V. State, 161 S. W. 966. 471; Fraud, g 49; Principal and Agent, $ 123.

CALENDARS. IV. COMPENSATION AND LIEN. See Trial, g 11. $ 49 (Ark.) That a broker did not notify the owner of the name of his prospective purchas- CANCELLATION OF INSTRUMENTS, er held no defense to an action for a commis-See Appeal and Error, 88_742, 1172; Bills and sion.-Reich v. Workman, 161 S. W. 180.

Notes, $ 102; Chattel Mortgages, § 241; $ 54 (Mo.App.) It is sufficient if the purchas- Costs, 8 32; Justices of the Peace, g 44; er is ready to complete the purchase within a Quieting Title; Reformation of Instruments; reasonable time.-Bunyard v. Farman, 161 S. Sales, $ 23. W. 640.

$ 54 (Tex.Civ.App.) A broker was not requir- I. RIGHT OF ACTION AND DEFENSES. ed to prove that his purchasers were ready, will

$ 6 (Mo.App.) Makers of a note, who later be ing, and able to buy, where defendants on re- came only sureties by third persons assuming ceiving notice of the sales wrote plaintiff and payment, on being discharged by extension of the proposed purchasers confirming the same.

time of payment, were not entitled to a cancelE. R. & D. C. Kolp v. Brazer, 161 S. W. 899. lation of the instrument.-Citizens' Bank of

8 56 (Ark.) A broker held entitled to commis- Senath v. Douglass, 161 S. W. 601. sion where he interested the purchaser and was the procuring cause of the sale, although it was

CARNAL KNOWLEDGE. consummated by defendant.-Reich v. Workman, 161 S. W. 180.

See Rape. $ 60 (Mo.App.) Owner held entitled, after

CARRIERS. production of purchaser by broker, to reasonable time in which to make deed, prepare ab- See Appeal and Error, 88 1064, 1066; Comstract, and correct any curable defects therein merce, $$ 16, 47; Judgment, $ 715; Master and not liable for commissions if the purchaser and Servant, § 86; Release, 57; Trial, & refuses to allow such reasonable time.-Bun

228. yard v. Farman, 161 S. W. 640. What is a reasonable time for an owner of

II. CARRIAGE OF GOODS. land to make a deed, prepare an abstract, and (B) Bills of Lading, Shipping Receipts, correct any curable defects therein after the

and Special Contracts. production of a purchaser by a broker depends

$ 55 (Tenn.) A "bill of lading" is not a ne on the facts of each case.--Id.

gotiable instrument but is merely a contract by

a carrier to deliver the goods described at a V. ACTIONS FOR COMPENSATION.

particular place according to the usual course $85 (Mo.App.) Where the

claimed of transportation.-Fourth Nat. Bank v. Nasbthat the purchaser refused to complete the pur- ville, C. & St. L. Ry. Co., 161 S. W. 1144. chase because of curable defects in the title, a decree correcting a misdescription in the own- subject to the consignor's order, with draft at:

8 57 (Mo.App.) A purchaser of goods shipped er's deed held admissible to show the owner's tached, before honoring the draft, has no right ability to cure such defect, though not recorded, to maintain replevin against the carrier to obshown by the abstract, or known to the broker. tain possession of the goods.-Burgess F. St. -Bunyard v. Farman, 161 S. W. 640.

Louis & S. F. R. Co., 161 S. W. 858. § 86 (Tex.Civ.App.) A broker's evidence that he made the contracts held to establish a prima tached to a bill of lading held by complainant

8 59 (Tenn.) Where the draft originally atfacie case without proof by each of the pur- bank by transfer, as well as three other drafts chasers.-E. R. & D. C. Kolp v. Brazer, 161 against the same bill, were dishonored and taken S. W. 899.

up by the maker before the fifth draft was made, 8 88 (Mo.App.) Evidence held to make a ques- at which time the bill which covered a domestic tion for the jury as to whether the prospective shipment was more than three months old, held, purchaser was ready, willing, and able to pur- that the bank was not an innocent transferee of chase.-Bunyard v. Farman, 161 S. W. 640. the bill of lading.-Fourth Nat. Bank v. Nash

Where the owner claimed that a prospective ville, C. & St. L. Ry. Co., 161 S. W. 1144. purchaser, upon examination of abstract, refus

8 69 (Tenn.) Though railroad ed to complete the purchase under any circum- wrongfully delivered grain without the surren

company stances, an instruction held erroneous as deny: der of the bill of lading, the consignor had no ing the owner a reasonable time within which right of action against it where they were not to cure defects in his title.-Id.

injured because they had received payment for

their goods.-Fourth Nat. Bank v. Nashville, C. BURGLARY.

& St. L. Ry. Co., 161 S. W. 1144.

In an action by the holder of a bill of lading I. OFFENSES AND RESPONSIBILITY for surrendering freight without presentation of THEREFOR.

the bill of lading, evidence held to show that 83 (Tex.Cr.App.) If the wrecking of saloons cause of the bank's loss.-Id.

defendant's negligence was not the proximate was for the purpose of stealing goods from them, all present and engaging in it would be

(F) Loss of or Injury to Goods. guilty of burglary, but if the breaking was ac

$ 132 (Tex.Civ.App.) There is no presumption tuated only by a mob and riot spirit, with no intent to appropriate the property, there was carriage, was in the same condition as when de

that property, when delivered to a carrier for no burglary.-Jobe v. State, 161 S. W. 966.

livered to the consignee, where there was evi. II. PROSECUTION AND PUNISHMENT. livered to the company and was damaged when

dence that it was in good condition when de841 (Mo.) Evidence held to sustain a finding delivered to the consignee.- Missouri, K. & T. that defendant broke into a corncrib.-State v. Ry. Co. of Texas v, Western Automatic Music Duff, 101 S. W. 683.

Co., 161 S. W. 380.



« ForrigeFortsett »