p12 (Ind.) Adoption of one of statutory rem-
edies for review of judgment waives other.-
Talge Mahogany Co. v. Astoria Mahogany Co.,
145 N. E. 495.

III. DECISIONS REVIEWABLE.

(D) Finality of Determination.

~76(1) (Ind.) Appeal will lie only from
"final judgment."-Louden v. Elice, 145 N. E.
763.

80 (6) (III.) Appeal lies from part of de-
cree dealing with particular subject, and op-
erates as severance in trial court of parties
and questions not concerned in appeal.-Hoier
v. Kaplan, 145 N. E. 243.

Order of dismissal of petition with respect
to certain items held appealable.-Id.

84(1) (Mass.) Appeal from appellate di-
vision, reversing rulings and ordering new
trial, held premature.-Matson v. Sbrega, 145
N. E. 35.

(E) Nature, Scope, and Effect of De-

cision.

any, held waived.-Southern Ry. Co. v. Wahl,
145 N. E. 523.

(C) Exceptions.

265(1) (Ohio) Defendant taking no excep-
tion, judgment for nominal damages for wrong-
ful refusal to transfer stock is conclusive as to
conversion.-Cincinnati Finance Co. v. Booth,
145 N. E. 543.

265 (2) (Ind.App.) Where neither party ex-
cepted to trial court's conclusion of law, er-
ror in stating_it_waived.-Sansberry v. Cor-
nelius, 145 N. E. 521.

(D) Motions for New Trial.

300 (Ind.App.) Motion for new trial. not
filed within 30 days after filing of court's special
findings, too late; "decision."-People's State
Bank v. Buchanan, 145 N. E. 898.

301 (Ind.App.) Error in overruling plea in
abatement must be presented by motion for
new trial thereof.-Kanouse v. Ballard, 145 N.
E. 441.

Motion for new trial not based on any of
112 (Ind.App.) Appellate court may as- statutory grounds not considered.-Id.
sume jurisdiction on appeal to set aside judg-302 (5) (Ind.App.) Objection to finding not
ment, void for want of jurisdiction.-Crowell considered, since not assigned as error or rais-
v. Crowell, 145 N. E. 780.
ed in motion for new trial.-Andrews v. Peters,
145 N. E. 579.

113(2)(Ind.) Expiration of time to appeal
before suing to review judgment in circuit court,
precludes appeal from judgment in suit to re-
view.-Talge Mahogany Co. v. Astoria Mahog-
any Co., 145 N. E. 495.

V. PRESENTATION AND RESERVATION
IN LOWER COURT OF GROUNDS
OF REVIEW.

VII. REQUISITES AND PROCEEDINGS
FOR TRANSFER OF CAUSE.

(A) Time of Taking Proceedings.
351(2) (Ind.App.) Steps necessary to per-
fect term-time appeal.-People's State Bank v.
Buchanan, 145 N. E. 898.
Term-time appeal held duly taken.-Id.
(B) Petition

or

Prayer, Allowance, and
Certificate or Affidavit.

(A) Issues and Questions in Lower Court.
173(2) (Mass.) Matters not urged before
auditor or at trial not considered on appeal.-
Greenburg v. Stoehrer & Pratt Dodgem Cor-361(1) (Ind.App.) Formal prayer for term-
poration, 145 N. E. 824.
time appeal unnecessary.-People's State Bank
v. Buchanan, 145 N. E. 898.

173(9) (1.) Defense of estoppel not made
below cannot be entertained.-People v. Engle,
145 N. E. 231.

174 (Ind.App.) Question of plaintiff's right
to maintain action for lack of mental capacity
not considered when not raised below.-South-
ern Ry. Co. v. Wahl, 145 N. E. 523.

(B) Objections and Motions, and Rulings

Thereon.

187(3) (III.) Objection that beneficiaries
are not parties to suit respecting trust prop-
erty available on appeal.-Ambos v. Glos, 145
N. E. 639.

193(1) (III.) Insufficiency of declaration
for recall of judgment of dismissal not pre-
sented, in absence of demurrer, plea, or other
proper objection.-Harris v. Chicago House-
Wrecking Co., 145 N. E. 666.

~525(1)(II.) Propositions submitted to
court and rulings not considered, unless incor-
porated in bill of exceptions.-National Can
Co. v. Weirton Steel Co., 145 N. E. 389.
205 (Mass.) Prejudice by exclusion of evi-525(1) (Ind.App.) Error in giving instruc-
dence not shown, in absence of offer of show- tions not considered, since not properly brought
ing as to expected answer.-Cambridge Motor into record.-Kanouse v. Ballard, 145 N. E.
Co. v. Estabrook, 145 N. E. 465.
441.

215(1) (Mass.) Question of erroneous in-527(1) (III.) Verdict and findings part of
struction not open for first time in Supreme record.-National Can Co. v. Weirton Steel Co.,
Court. Kenyon v. Vogel, 145 N. E. 462.
145 N. E. 389.

218(1) (Ind.App.) Error in returning gen-528(1) (Ind.App.) Error in overruling mo-
eral verdict in action for personal injuries, if tion for new trial not presented by bill of ex-
any, held waived.-Southern Ry. Co. v. Wahl, ceptions presented to trial judge after close of
145 N. E. 523.
term. Conover v. Cooper, 145 N. E. 779.

228 (Ohio) Exceptions to entry of rever-529(I) (III.) Judgment part of record.-
sal and remand held sufficient for review by National Can Co. v. Weirton Steel Co., 145 N.
Supreme Court.-Gibbs v. Scioto Valley Ry. & E. 389.
Power Co., 145 N. E. 854.

or Statement of Facts.

233(1) (Ind.) Act of counsel in personal (C) Necessity of Bill of Exceptions, Case,
injury action held not to require new trial, in
absence of proper objection.-Louisville & N.544(1) (Ohio) Errors predicated on alleged
R. & Lighting Co. v. Beck, 145 N. E. 886. bill of exceptions not considered, where no bill
of exceptions taken or filed.-Marriott v. Hawk,
145 N. E. 287.

236(2)(.) Defendant not requesting or
moving for leave to file special pleas after
amendment of declaration cannot complain of
court's refusal.-Oberman v. Camden Fire Ins.
Ass'n, 145 N. E. 351.

Issues raised held not before court in ab-
sence of bill of exceptions or allowance of
transcript.-Id.

237 (6) (Ind.App.) Error in returning gen-549(1) (II.) Exceptions to rulings cannot
eral verdict in action for personal injuries, if be preserved by mere recitals in judgment or

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

order. Harris v. Chicago House-Wrecking Co.
145 N. E. 666.

(F) Making, Form, and Requisites of
Transcript or Return.

608(1) (III.) Transcript of record not in
accordance with rules.-Road Dist. No. 4 v.
Frailey, 145 N. E. 195.

(H) Transmission, Filing, Printing, and
Service of Coples.

628 (2) (Ohio) Nonfeasance of clerk in fur-
nishing transcript not ground for dismissal of
petition in error, where transcript filed im-
mediately on discovery thereof.-Columber v.
City of Kenton, 145 N. E. 12.

(K) Questions Presented for Review.

pages where they and evidence can be found.—
Trick v. Eckhouse, 145 N. E. 587.

773(5) (Ind.) Appellees' failure to file brief
regarded as confession of error.-Pittsburgh, C.,
C. & St. L. R. Co. v. Linder, 145 N. E. 885.
to controvert
773 (5) (Ind.App.) Failure
error assigned in brief can be taken as confes-
sion of error.-Marion Malleable Iron Works v.
Baldwin, 145 N. E. 559.

XVI. REVIEW.

(A) Scope and Extent in General.
842(1) (Ind.App.) When assessments un-
der Ohio laws were made and when they be-
came lien held questions of fact for trial court.
-Noffsinger v. Tritt, 145 N. E. 783.

842(1) (Mass.) Remark of judge concern-
ing counsel's argument held not ruling as to
pertinent question of law which could be sub-
ject of exception.-O'Neill v. Ross, 145 N. E.
60.

692 (1) (Mass.) Prejudice by exclusion of
evidence not shown, in absence of offer or show-
ing as to expected answer.-Cambridge Motor 843(3) (Ind.App.) On showing that appel-
Co. v. Estabrook, 145 N. E. 465.
lant received substantial justice, consideration
of alleged erroneous rulings as to admission
of evidence not necessary.-Charters v. Citi-
zens' Nat. Bank of Peru, 145 N. E. 517.

694(1) (Mass.) Findings not set aside
where evidence not reported.-Gadreault v.
Sherman, 145 N. E. 49.

694(1) (Mass.) Finding that petitioner for
appointment of conservator was not friend of
respondent one of fact, and conclusive, in ab-
sence of evidence.-Flaherty v. Whitin, 145 N.
E. 51.

694(1) (Mass.) Facts found by master,
unless inconsistent, must stand, where evi-
dence not reported.-Porter v. Spring, 145 N.
E. 52.

694(1) (Mass.) Master's finding that bro-
ker was procuring cause of sale must stand, if
based on unreported evidence, but not if mere
inference from other findings.-Nichols v. Ath-
erton, 145 N. E. 277.

846 (6) (Ind.App.) Decisions of courts of
Illinois not controlling where trial court failed
to make any findings as to law of Illinois.--New
York Life Ins. Co. v. Adams, 145 N. E. 499.
(B) Interlocutory, Collateral, and Supple-
mentary Proceedings and Questions.

874 (1) (III.) Cross-error questioning or-
der of reinstatement, on appeal from subse-
quent order striking case from docket, not con-
sidered.-Harris v. Chicago House-Wrecking
Co., 145 N. E. 666.

(C) Parties Entitled to Allege Error.

694(1) (Mass.) Findings of fact conclusive,878(1) (Mass.) Prevailing party_without
where evidence not reported.-Roach v. Sturdy,
concern with requests for ruling.-Davis v.
145 N. E. 429.
694(1) (Mass.) Finding of master must Smith-Springfield Body Corporation, 145 N. E.
434.
stand, where evidence unreported.-Pietrzkyow-
ski v. Legault Housing Corporation, 145 N. E.
466.

(E) Presumptions.

901 (Ind.App.) Burden on appellant to
show reversible error.-Trick v. Eckhouse, 145
N. E. 587.

696(1) (Mass.) General finding for defend-
ant must stand, unless wholly unwarranted as
matter of law, where evidence not reported.-907 (2) (Ind.App.) No presumption of im-
Gorman v. MacPherson, 145 N. E. 421.
proper allowance for attorney fees.-Trick v.
Eckhouse, 145 N. E. 587.

708 (Ind.) Overruling motion to modify
judgment held not available as error in absence
of special findings.-Louisville & N. R. & Light-
ing Co. v. Beck, 145 N. E. 886.

XI. ASSIGNMENT OF ERRORS.

719(8) (Ind.App.) Objection to finding not
considered, since not assigned as error.-An-
drews v. Peters. 145 N. E. 579.

907 (2) (Mass.) Intent to elect curtesy held
not inferable in direct contravention of actual
intent found by master.-Porter v. Spring, 145
N. E. 52.

916(1) (Ind.App.) Failure of party to pro-
cure reply to answer is waiver thereof, and
averments of answer will be taken as denied.-
Costigan v. Schalk, 145 N. E. 510.

927 (2) (III.) Order reinstating cause after
term in which dismissed assumed made in stat-
utory proceeding. Harris v. Chicago House-
Wrecking Co., 145 N. E. 666.

721 (1) (Ind.App.) Joint assignment of er-
ror must be good as to all that join therein.
City of Huntingburg v. State, 145 N. E. 443.
721(2) (Ind.App.) Appellate court preclud-930(1) (Ind.) Appellate Court required to
ed from discussing demurrer on merits where
assignments of error not good as to all parties
joining therein.-City of Huntingburg v. State,
145 N. E 443.

733 (III.) Whether judgment unsupported
by record, reviewable in Supreme Court on ap-
peal from Appellate Court-National Can Co.
v. Weirton Steel Co., 145 N. E. 389.

XII. BRIEFS.

assume that verdict was based on evidence suffi-
cient to sustain it.-Louisville & N. R. & Light-
ing Co. v. Beck, 145 N. E. 886.

931 (1) (Ind.) Appellate Court must accept
as true evidence that trial court believed and
acted upon.-Montgomery v. Pierson, 145 N. E.
771.

931 (5) (Mass.) Assumed that trial judge
in making finding considered all material evi-
dence.--Graustein v. Wyman, 145 N. E. 450.

(F) Discretion of Lower Court.

758(2) (Ind.App.) Exclusion of evidence
not considered in absence of showing of objec-
tions and exceptions.-Trick v. Eckhouse, 145983 (3) (II.) Chancellor's discretion in re-
N. E. 587.
viewing master's acts not interfered with on
review, unless abused.-Worden v. Rayburn,
145 N. E. 101.

758(3) (Ind.) Mere assertion that request-
ed instruction stated law correctly on issues,
without showing particular application, pre-
sents no question.-General American Tank Car
Corporation v. Melville, 145 N. E. 890.

(G) Questions of Fact, Verdicts, and
Findings.

760 (2) (Ind.App.) Exclusion of evidence 992 (Ind.App.) Proof of loss as basis for
not considered in absence of showing of ob- secondary evidence question for trial court.-
jections and exceptions or reference to record Kanouse v. Ballard, 145 N. E. 441.

994(1) (III.) Supreme Court does not de- | 1052(5) (Mass.) Verdict for defendant
termine credibility of witnesses.-Phillabaum v. rendered evidence of price paid by defendant
Lake Erie & W. R. Co., 145 N. E. 806.
for land as basis of amount of compensation
994 (3) (Mass.) Denial of rulings for judg- immaterial.-O'Neill v. Ross, 145 N. E. 60.
ment, dependent on credibility of witnesses, not 1052(8) (III.) Admission in ejectment of
reviewable.-Mantalbano v. Goldman, 145 N. E. proof of dissolution of injunction against
boundary fence held harmless error; judgment
being for right party.-Kesl v. Cobine, 145 N.
E. 148.

459.

995 (11.) Supreme Court does not weigh
evidence.-Phillabaum v. Lake Erie & W. R.
Co., 145 N. E. 806.

996 (Ind.) Where facts showed defendant's
negligence and plaintiff's freedom therefrom,
verdict for plaintiff is binding.-General Ameri-
can Tank Car Corporation v. Melville, 145 N. E.
890.

996 (Mass.) Master's finding that broker
was procuring cause of sale must stand, if
based on unreported evidence, but not if mere
inference from other findings.-Nichols
Atherton, 145 N. E. 277.

1052 (8) (Ind.) Errors in admission of evi-
dence, in suit to set aside deed for undue in-
fluence, held harmless.-Montgomery v. Pierson,
145 N. E. 771.

1054(1) (Mass.) Any error in admitting
testimony of plaintiff's statements held harm-
less, when master considered case independent-
ly of such statements.-Jameson v. Hayes, 145
N. E. 457.
V.1056 (1) (Mass.) Exclusion of evidence
concerning price paid by defendant for land
1001 (1) (III.) Appellate Court is author- held harmless.-O'Neill v. Ross, 145 N. E. 60.
ized to reverse, with finding of facts, only 1064(1) (Ohio) Statement in general
where evidence is lacking.-Roe v. Roe, 145 N. charge that defendant in cross-petition raised
E. 804.
claim of contributory negligence held without
prejudicial_error.-Gibbs v. Scioto Valley Ry.
& Power Co., 145 N. E. 854.

1002 (N.Y.) Conflicting testimony must
yield, so far as necessary, to plaintiff's version,
on appeal from judgment for plaintiff.-Shirley 1064 (4) (Ind.) Giving of inaccurate in-
v. Larkin Co., 145 N. E. 751.
struction, which did not affect result, held with-
1004 (3) (Ind.) $35,000 damages for leg out reversible error.-General American Tank
crushed off and other injuries held not excessive. Car Corporation v. Melville, 145 N. E. 890.
-General American Tank Car Corporation v. 1068 (3) (Mass.) Plaintiff not harmed by
Melville, 145 N. E. 890.
instructions, unless case one for jury.-Barber
v. Rathvon, 145 N. E. 866.

1009 (4) (II.) Chancellor's finding of dam-
ages from construction of dam not disturbed 1068(5) (Mass.) Plaintiff not harmed by
unless palpably contrary to weight of testi- instructions, unless case one for jury.-Barber
mony.-Deterding v. Central Illinois Public v. Rathvon, 145 N. E. 866.
Service Co., 145, N. E. 185.

1010(1) (Mass.) Finding reversed, where
evidence does not support it.-Inhabitants of
Lanesborough v. Inhabitants of Ludlow, 145
N. E. 57.

(1) Error Waived in Appellate Court.
1078(1) (Mass.) Exceptions not argued
waived.-Davis v. Smith-Springfield Body Cor-
poration, 145 N. E. 434.

1010(1) (Mass.) Findings of fact by trial
judge held final, if supported by evidence.-Da-1078(1) (Mass.) Questions not discussed in
vis v. Smith-Springfield Body Corporation, 145 brief waived.-Gauthier v. Quick, 145 N. E.
N. E. 434.
436.

1011(1) (Ind.) Appellate court cannot re- 1078(3) (Ind. App.) Objections to com-
verse judgment on weight of conflicting evi- plaint in memorandum held to present nothing
dence.-Blain v. City of Delphi, 145 N. E. 764. for consideration of appellate court.-Southern
~1011(1) (Ind.) Appellate Court cannot dis- Ry. Co. v. Wahl, 145 Ñ. E. 523.
turb trial court's finding supported by evidence.
-Montgomery v. Pierson, 145 N. E. 771.

1078 (4) (Mass.) Exceptions to admission
of evidence not argued are waived.-Sullivan v.
Northridge, 145 N. E. 460.

(J) Decisions of Intermediate Courts.

1083(1) (I.) When findings not reviewed
in Supreme Court on appeal from Appellate
Court.-National Can Co. v. Weirton Steel Co.,
145 N. E. 389.

1091(1) (N.Y.) Defendants' evidence as-
sumed true on appeal from judgment affirming
judgment on directed verdict for plaintiff.-
Broad & Lackawanna Realty Co. v. Breitung,
al-145 N. E. 915.

1030 (Ind.) Judgment affirmed where
leged irregularities of practice not shown to
have affected result.-Blain v. City of Delphi,
145 N. E. 764.

1094 (1) (N.Y.) Reversal by Appellate Di-
vision on law and facts not disturbed unless,
conceding all disputed facts finding in appel-
lant's favor follows as matter of law. In re
Bistany, 145 N. E. 70.

1036(4) (III.) Defendant held not preju-
diced by substitution of plaintiffs, and order
that pleas filed stand to amended declaration.-1094(2) (III.) Judgment based on conflict-
Oberman v. Camden Fire Ins. Ass'n, 145 N. ing evidence, and affirmed by Appellate Court,
E. 351.
cannot be reversed by Supreme Court.-Roe v.
Roe, 145 N. E. 804.

1039 (8) (Ind.) Judgment not reversed for
overruling of motion to make immaterial aver-1094 (3) (N.Y.) Court of Appeals cannot
ment more specific.-Baltimore & O. S. W. R. reverse for failure of proof decree which Ap-
Co. v. Berdon, 145 N. E. 2.
pellate Division has unanimously affirmed.-
In re Santrucek, 145 N. E. 739.

1040 (7) (Ind.App.) Error, if any, in sus-
taining demurrer to paragraph of answer harm-1094(3) (N.Y.) Finding, unanimously af-
less, where material facts alleged provable un- firmed by Appellate Division, as to wife's ex-
der other paragraphs.-Charters v. Citizens' pectancy, assumed to be correct by Court of
Nat. Bank of Peru, 145 N. E. 517.
Appeals.-Feldman v. Lisansky, 145 N. E. 746.
1050(1) (Mass.) Master's statement of in-1094(5) (III.) Supreme Court's inquiry,
tended conduct toward injured employee, and
advice as to amputation of hand, held inadmis-
sible and prejudicial.-Wilson v. Daniels, 145 N.
E. 469.

where case tried by jury and reversed by Ap-
pellate Court on facts without remanding, stat-
ed.-Phillabaum v. Lake Erie & W. R. Co.,
145 N. E. 806.

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

XVII. DETERMINATION AND DISPO-
SITION OF CAUSE.

8 (Ind.) No question determined by original
decree can be litigated on application for writ.-
Rooker v. Fidelity Trust Co., 145 N. E. 493.
Only question on application for writ is
whether decree sought to be enforced has been
complied with.-Id.

Parties not entitled to jury trial nor to spe-
cial finding of facts.-Id.

Writ issued upon proof of demand of posses-
sion and a refusal.-Id.

Court held justified in finding that defendants
were in possession of lands involved, and were
refusing to comply with judgment.-Id.

ASSUMPTION OF RISK.

1177(7) (III.) Appellate Court cannot re-
verse on facts without remanding where evi- See Master and Servant, 204–217.
dence conflicting.-Wallace v. Odell, 145 N. E.
610.

II. PROPERTY SUBJECT TO ATTACH-
MENT.

62 (N.Y.) Undelivered draft to order of
foreign corporation held not attachable as its
property.-Erskine v. Nemours Trading Cor-
poration, 145 N. E. 273.

justified by suspicions.-Hart v. State, 145 N. See Criminal Law,

II.
(D) Warrant and Custody of Property.
101 (Mass.) Debtor may not lawfully
make payments to bankrupt's creditors, in ab-
(Ind.) Nature of proceeding stated.-sence of contract or obligation.-Ninth School
Rooker v. Fidelity Trust Co., 145 N. E. 493.

165(1) (Mass.) Assertion of right to en-
force lien on pledge to secure lease not prefer-
ence.-Reed v. Bristol County Realty Co., 14586 (Mass.) Promise to pay drafts held con-

140(3) (Ind.App.) Parol acceptance of 356 (III.) Bank merely giving credit to
check creates no liability thereon.-Mansfield v.
Goldsmith Bank, 145 N. E. 586.

147(1) (III.) Generally drawee paying mon-
ey on forged check or draft cannot recover
from one, equally innocent, receiving money.-380 (N.Y.) Makers, intrusting broker with
First State Bank & Trust Co. v. First Nat. apparently valid negotiable notes, cannot es-
cape liability to innocent purchaser for value.-
Bank, 145 N. E. 382.
Broad & Lackawanna Realty Co. v. Breitung,
145 N. E. 915.

154(6) (III.) Delay or negligence in discov-145 N. E. 915.
ering forgery of check raises presumption of
loss to others. First State Bank & Trust Co. II. EVIDENCE, ASCERTAINMENT, AND ES-
v. First Nat. Bank, 145 N. E. 382.

(F) Exchange, Money, Securities, and In-4 (III.) Instruction on effect of agreement

1881/2 (N.Y.) Liability of bank for amount 46(1) (11.) Owners cannot transfer land
deposited in Russian branch held not affected
by acts of Russian government.-Sokoloff v. Na-
tional City Bank of New York, 145 N. E. 917.
Liability to repay amount deposited in Russian
branch bank held not defeated by implied con-
dition.-Id.

3 (Ind.App.) Man marrying a pregnant wo-
man presumed to be father of the child.-Phil-(2) (Mass.) Examiner for registrar of
motor vehicles is public officer.-Commonwealth
lips v. State, 145 N. E. 895.

Relatrix's sexual relations with husband prior V. Tsaffras, 145 N. E. 922.

Evidence held insufficient to rebut presump- I. ESTABLISHMENT. CONSTRUCTION, AND
tion of legitimacy.-Id.

4 (Ind.App.) Proof required of state in
bastardy proceedings stated.-Phillips v. State, 7 (1.) Township must build bridge across
145 N. E. 895.
natural water course of sufficient length and