3--Municipal, is creature purely of sta- tute; power to "license and regu- late," effect of; nature of ordinances passed in pursuance thereof. Ex parte Frank on Habeas Corpus, 4-What articles must set forth; effect of articles. Monterey and Salinas Val- ley R. R. Co. v. Hildreth,
CREDITORS.-May attack fraudulent deed. Ybarra v. Lorenzana,
CRIMINAL LAW.-Jury must have no reasonable doubt of guilt. People v. Morine, 2-Defendant entitled to benefit of doubt in degree of offence; jury may find guilty of any offence included in indictment. People v. Jones, 3- The locus delicti must be proved un- der plea of "not guilty.” "People v. Bevans,
4.-Accomplice of sheriff not guilty of burglary. People v. Collins, 5-Definition of poison intended by sec. 216, Penal Code. People v. Van Deleer,
DAMAGES.-Action by one corpora tion against another to be limited to actual damages sustained. Stockton and Linden G. R. Co. v. Stocton and Copperopolis R. R. Co., 2-Diverting water from its natural channel; owner of land entitled to; erroneous instruction. Creighton v. Evans, 3-Actions for negligence, rule of. Chi- dester v. Con. People's Ditch Co., 4-Rule of, in action on attachment un- dertaking. Hurd v. Barnhardt, DEED.-Description in, to be most strongly construed against grantor. Hagar v. Spect,
against one who wrongfully assumes to act as attorney in fact for another. Hagar v. Spect, EVIDENCE.- -(See School Trustees; Criminal Law, 1, 2; New Trial; Rape.) Negligence, when question of fact, to be left to jury; evidence of experts not admissible, nor opinions of witnesses. Shafter v. Evans, EXECUTOR.- Powers of, suspended until determination of petition alleging waste. Estate of White. 2-Cannot present unsettled account of deceased executor. Wetzler v. Fitch, 46 3-Is an officer of the court; holds property of the estate in trust. Ex parte Smith. (See Contempt.) FACTORS.- -Power of, to deal with property. Green v. Campbell, FINDINGS. (See Practice, 2.) Gen- eral, in favor of one party or the other, not sufficient; must dispose of the issues. Johnson v. Squires, 2-Affirmative
5-Must support judgment. People of City and County of San Francisco v. Quackenbush,
6-Must show possession of mining ground and title acquired under act of Congress of May 10, 1872.
DEFAULT.--Not opened to let in tech- nical defense. Ridley v. Scott et al., DIVORCE.--Failure to prove grounds of, cause of reversal. Christie v. Christie, DRIFTED LUMBER.-Proofs to be made in action for; defendant's claim of damages imposes no duty on plain- tiff in selection of appraisers ; section 2,390 Political Code. Flanders v. Locke, 2-Owner of, on land of another not a tresspasser. Ibid, EASEMENT.-What is a grant of. Cave et al. v. Crofts et al., EJECTMENT.-If no evidence of ad- verse possession, instructions will not be considered. Green v. Whipple, 244 2-Effect of adverse possession for five years in. Unger v. Roper,
INDEX TO DECISIONS OF CALIFORNIA.
inalice and want of probable cause must concnr. Anderson et al. v. Coleman, 397 INSTRUCTIONS.-(See Damages, 2.) Must not be contradictory. Chidestër ' v. Con. People's Ditch Co., 2-Proof of Special agreement required by. Hurd v. Barnhardt, JURISDICTION.-Of Justice of the Peace in trespass where answer in- volves question of title. Livingston v. Morgan,
LAND OFFICE.-Application at, to ob- tain title does not tend to show con- trol over lands applied for. Pulliam et al. v. Cherokee Flat Blue Gravel Company,
LETTERS TESTAMENTARY.--To a person not designated ir the Court or- der, vid. Estate of Frey. (See Common Property.)
2-When issued without bond one may subsequently be required. Estate of White,
MARRIED WOMEN.-Husband must join in power of attorney executed by wife. Heinlen v. Martin
MINES AND MINING. Mining ground must be so marked as to en- able to trace boundaries. Holland et al. v. Mount Auburn Gold Quartz M. Company. (See Findings, 6,) MORTGAGE.--In suit to foreclose, per- sons beneficially interested are proper parties; not so those claiming adverse- ly to mortgegor. Croghan v. Minor and Spence, 2-Mortgagee subsequent to homestead declaration, no right to redeem from sale under prior mortgage. Hershey v. Dennis, 3-Lien of, for deficiency not depend-
ent on action of sheriff or clerk; their duties ministerial. Frost v. Meetz, 4-Failure to pay interest on note se- cured by, effect of; may be foreclosed in part. Bank of San Louis Obispo v. Johnson, NEW TRIAL-Must be granted in case of murder, when death not proved. People v. Wong Shu Shut,
effect of subsequent action against firm. Barber v. Barnes, PARTIES. Purchasers in possession of land to be made parties in action to determine title. Robinson v. Gleeson, 88 PARTITION.-Any one of several co- tenants of real property may institute proceedings in; where ordered, or a sale directed, an interlocutory decree is indispensable. Lorenz v. Jacobs, 90 PETITION FOR RE-HEARING.- Omission to file in time. Baker v. Carrillo, PLEADINGS.-Must be appropriate and directed to particular issues before re- lief can be given on that ground. Bih- ler v. Platt,
2-In action for goods furnished wife, complaint must aver them sold to husband. Simon, Jacobs & Co. v. Scott,
3-If no counter claim, plaintiff may dismiss action; what is not a counter claim; appealable order. James et al. v. Center et al.,
4-Averment of ownership of fences in trespass unnecessary where plaintiff has possession of lands. Livingston v. Moran, 5-Under general denial special matters of defense not to be proved. McGuire y. Quintana. (See Criminal Law, 3,) 246 6---Assumed sufficiency of denial in an- swer, effect of. Cave et al. v. Crafts et al. (See Undertaking.) POISON.-Definition of. (See Criminal Law, 5.)
POWER OF ATTORNEY.-(See Mar- ried Women.)
PRACTICE. —(See Replevin; New Trial, 2.) An estate in fee not necessary to maintain an action for determination of adverse claim to real estate. Pierce v. Felter,
4-Errors of law to be excepted to. Smith v. Lawrence,
2 Will be awarded, when judgment for too much. Sepulveda v. Jolinson, 248 PARTNERSHIP.--Decree of dissolu- tion when; accounting when; failure of firm does not work dissolution;
5--Acceptance of notice of motion for new trial, effect of. Frost v. Meetz, 155 6-Denial of rehearing not to control ac- tion of Court below. Keller v. Tansey, 244 PRESUMPTION. —( See School Trus-
PUBLIC LAND.-Defective application for, prior to June 12, 1868, cured by
INDEX TO DECISIONS OF CALIFORNIA.
statute of March 24, 1870. Wanzer v. Somers, 2-In equitable claim to patented lands, residence of pre-emption settler must be on proper Congressional subdi- vision to which land belonged. Fer- guson v. McLaughlin, RAPE. What constitutes; difference between, and seduction; when evi- dence of experts inadmissible. People v. Royal,
RE-ARGUMENT.-Order of Court on. Noe v. Splivalo, Talcott v. Board of State Harbor Com- missioners,
REPLEVIN.--Negative as well as affir- mative defenses may be set up, and the pleading of the affirmative matter not a waiver of the other. Billings v. Drew, 2-Judgment in, based on indefinite findings erroneous. Kelly v. Mc- Kibben,
3-Stipulation in, effect of; substitution of new parties in, effect of; judgment in such case. Temple v. Alexander, Sheriff, 4-Action of, to recover U. S. Patent. (Chipley v. Farris, 45 Cal., 527, ap- plied.) Honghton v. Hardenburgh, SCHOOL LAND.-First applicant for, after survey, entitled to certificate of purchase; land identified by survey. Oakley v. Stewart, SCHOOL TRUSTEES.-Persons acting as such presumed to be officers de jure. Delphi School District v. Murray, SHERIFF. (See Criminal Law, 4.) Cannot be compelled by mandamus to contradict his return; deed of, if incon- sistent with return, nevertheless valid; not to be compelled on mandamus to deliver deed. Hewell v. Lane, STATE LANDS. -Decision of Land De- partment upon questions of purchase of, conclusive. Wilkinson v. Merrill, 249 2-Application to purchase lieu land. Boggs v. Mullen,
County of San Francisco v. Quacken- bush, 3-Notice inviting sealed proposals and not referring to diagram, invalid; property not bound. City of Stockton v. Clark, 4-Resolution of City Council relative to; effect of. City of Stockton v. Skinner, TAXES.-May be levied by the Legis lature either before or after value of property is ascertained; provision that would exempt from taxation, if so construed, void. People v. Latham, 2-Deed for, when void on face; threat to sell under illegal levy of, not du- Wills v. Austin, Tax Collector, etc., (See Constitutional Law.) TENANTS IN COMMON.-Nature of title not changed by transfers to dif- ferent grantees; lands may be held in common and in severalty according to the derivation of title. Bihler v. Platt, 10 2-What establishes the relation of. 169 Heinlen v. Martin, TENDER.--Necessity of, waived by denial of contract; averment in com- plaint, that plaintiff is ready and will- ing, sufficient. Dowd v. Clark, TRESPASS.-Cannot be committed by persons in the adverse possession of land under claim of right. Snow v. Kimmer. (See Drifted Lumber, 2.) 34 2--In action of, judgment not to be in gold coin. Livingston v. Morgan. (See Pleadings, 4.) 3-Cannot be divided into several causes of action. Guerra v. Newhall et al., 419 UNDERTAKING.-For condemnation of land, in action on, must be alleged to have been ccepted; also, that the property was taken for which compen- sation is sought; averment of damages Villac v. Stockton and
WAREHOUSE RECEIPT.--Is negotia- ble effect of transfer; possession of, endorsed in blank; pledge of to secure antecedent debt; notice to warehouse- man. Davis v. Russell, WATER RIGHTS.-Carried in pur- chase of land; adverse use of, for more than five years, effect of; grant of by act of Congress of July 26, 1866. Care et al. v. Crafts et al. (See Injunction.) 359 WILL. Construction of; contingent life estate in. Hilliard v. Pacheco et 406
WITNESS.-Cannot be contradicted on collateral point, nor cross-examined for
« ForrigeFortsett » |