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

jeopardy after conviction for petty larceny for See Abortion; Embezzlement; Extradition; stealing chickens.—People v. Snyder, 148 Ń. E.

False Pretenses; Fines; Grand Jury; Homicide; Indictment and Information; Rape, | ix. ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEAS, AND Cw18-59; Receiving Stolen Goods; Threats.



em 273 (Ohio) Plea of guilty in capital case Eww13 (Ind.) Statute declaring transportation willingly, freely, and deliberately after advice.

should be accepted only when defendant acts of liquor unlawful held not ambiguous or uncertain.--Guetling v. State, 148 N, E. 146.

State v. Ferranto, 148 N. E. 362. Ew44 (N.Y.) Neither combination, incitement, emo 274 (III.) Refusal to permit defendant, nor preparation is enough to constitute “at- who had pleaded guilty and testified for state in tempt to commit crime" completed without reliance on implied promise of immunity, to state making person liable to punishment in withdraw plea of guilty, held improper.-People state.-People v. Werblow, 148 N. E. 786.

v. Bogolowski, 148 N. E. 260. Acts held not to constitute "attempt to com

On 274 (Ohio) Granting permission to withmit". crime, unless they carry project forward draw plea of not guilty and plead guilty is within dangerous proximity to success.-Id.,

within trial court's discretion.--State v. FerThief, employing confederate to go to for- ranto, 148 N. E. 362. eign lands and there commit fraud, is not guil

X. EVIDENCE. ty of attempted crime; "attempt to commit crime."-Id.

(A) Judicial Notice, Presumptions, and Statute putting end to distinction between

Burden of Proof. principals and accessories before fact assimi- n 304(20) (Ind.) Court did not have judicial lates relation to that of principal and agent, knowledge that "beer" made from hops would and does not make an inciter guilty of attempt. develop 2.8 per cent. alcoholic content.-Shine -Id.

v. State, 148 N. E. 411. III. PARTIES TO OFFENSES.

(B) Facts in Issue and Relevant to Issues, Ow59(2) (N.Y.) Statute putting end to dis

and Res Geste. tinction between principals and accessories below 338(1) (Mass.) Question as to why, detecfore fact assimilates relation to that of princi- tive had not planned to trap defendant in com; pal and agent.--People v. Werblow, 148 N. E. mission of offense other than that charged held 786.

properly excluded immaterial.-CommonIV. JURISDICTION.

wealth v. Gettigan, 148 N. E. 113. Omw 90(1) (Ohio) Mayor of Gallipolis held with Evidence concerning threat to burn witness' out power to exercise criminal jurisdiction.-place held properly excluded as immaterial. State v. Davis, 148 N. E. 605.

-Id. Charter of city of Gallipolis held insufficient to warrant exercise of judicial power by mayor (C) Other Offenses, and Character of Acthereof.-Id.

93 (Mass.) District court held without ju-Own 369(1)(111.) Evidence of one crime may risdiction of offense of abortion.--Common- not be admitted to prove another, unless some wealth v. Nason, 148 N. E. 110.

connection between the two is shown.-People Em97(1/2) (N.Y.) In larceny by false pretens- v. Richie, 148 N. E. 265. es, place where crime is completed is place in 369(1) (ill.) Proof of commission of othwhere money or other property was obtained by er unconnected crimes incompetent.-People offender:- People v. Werblow, 148 N. E. 786. v. Goldman, 148 N. E. 873. m97(1) (N.Y.) If constituent acts, which w369(2) (Mass.) Evidence of extraneous ofunited are crime, are committed some in New fenses tending to establish commission of crime York, and some in another state, courts of New charged admissible.-Commonwealth v. GettiYork may punish for offense. People v. Wer- gan, 148 N. E. 113. blow, 148 N. E. 786.

369 (5) (11.) Evidence of embezzlement Crime is not committed “wholly or partly from other estates held admissible, in view of within state," unless act within state, if noth- confused condition of defendant's more had followed, would amount to at. People v. Goldman, 148 N. E. 873. tempt.-Id.

ww371 (1) (Mass.) Evidence of extraneous ofPart of crime has not been committed in fenses admissible, where tending to show instate, unless by something therein stage of ful- tent.--Commonwealth v. Corcoran, 148 N. E. fillment has been reached, and that of promise 123. left behind.-Id.

Om 372(1) (Mass.) Evidence of extraneous ofIncitement from abroad will entail criminal fenses admissible, where tending to show genresponsibility within state, if crime is commit- eral scheme.-Commonwealth v. Corcoran, 148 ted therein.-Id.

N. E. 123. Statute making act committed without state Evidence of extraneous offenses held admissipunishable within state held not to cover lar- ble as showing general scheme.-Id. ceny in another state.--Id.

Evidence of prior offenses held admissible, Buying draft within state to open account in though all of defendants had not participated foreign country and to accredit accused hela therein.-Id. pot part of obtaining money by false pretenses em 374 (Mass.) Where defendant's prior conin foreign country.-Id.

viction for embezzlement was established, exIndictment for obtaining money by false pre- clusion of evidence tending to explain such' contenses held not to show act abroad affecting viction was not erroneous.-Commonwealth v. persons or property within state.--Id.

Gettigan, 148 N. E. 113.

(D) Materiality and Competency in Gen200(1) (N.Y.) No "double jeopardy" in provision that up to particular point acts of Omw382 (Mass.) Testimony by defendant that accused constitute one crime and that his acts police officer had told him he thought he had committed thereafter constitute second crime. located source of telephone call held properly -People v. Snyder, 148 N. E. 796.

excluded.-Commonwealth v. Gettigan, 148 N. fm 200(3) (N.Y.) Conviction for burglary in E. 113. third degree for breaking into chicken coop w386 (Mass.) Testimony to telephone with intent to steal chickens held not double Iconversation held properly excluded for want

148 N.E.-60




of sufficient identification of person speaking. I wa655(1), (III.) As much duty of court to see -Commonwealth v. Gettigan, 148 N. E. 113. that defendant receives fair trial as it is to see

394 (Ind.) Defendant, objecting to intro- that people have fair trial.-People v. Black, duction of evidence obtained by search under | 148 N. E. 281. warrant, has burden of showing illegality of warrant.-Meno v. State, 148 N. E. 420.

(C) Reception of Evidence. (E) Best and Secondary and Demonstra

cm 680(1) (Mass.) Order in which evidence is tive Evidence.

admitted rests in discretion of trial judge.On 400 (9) (Mass.) Exclusion of memorandum

Commonwealth v. Corcoran, 148 N. E. 123. made by police officer as to what was said during telephone conversation had by him held not

(E) Arguments and Conduct of Counsel. error.-Commonwealth v. Gettigan, 148 N. E. Ow713 (11.) State's attorney required to 113.

treat defendant fairly, both in introduction of

evidence and argument to jury.-People v. (F) Admissions, Declarations, and Hear- Black, 148 N. E. 281. say.

72012 (111.) Improper for prosecuting atCum 409 (N.Y.) Evidence that accused had pre- | torney to express opinion of defendant's guilt, viously pleaded guilty to indictment held itself | except as based on evidence.-People v. Black, insufficient to_convict him.---People v. Stein- 148 N. E. 281. metz, 148 N. E. 597.

Ow730(9) (111.) Improper conduct and arguC419, 420(11) (ind.) Conversation of wife ment of prosecuting attorney held to require in absence of husband, after his arrest, not reversal.- People v. Black, 148 N. E. 281. competent evidence of his guilt.-Blum V. State, ww730(12) (III.) Improper conduct and argu148 N. E. 193.

ment of prosecuting attorney held to require

reversal.-People v. Black, 148 N. E. 281. (G') Acts and Declarations of Conspirators and Codefendants.

(F) Province of Court and Jury in Gen. 423(1) (Mass.) Acts and statements of

eral. persons engaged in common scheme to extort m742(2) (Ohio) Court should define accomare admissible against each other.—Common- plice and leave to jury question whether pitwealth v. Corcoran, 148 N. E. 123. Omw 427 (3) (Ohio) Evidence of conspiracy to

nesses were accomplices. -Curtis y, State, 148

N. E. 834. thwart justice, and evidence of official acts not constituting consummated similar crimes, if C763, 764(8) (Mass.) Instruction to disrein furtherance thereof, held competent.-Cur- lieved he was not present as claimed by defend

gard evidence of particular witness, if jury be. tis v. State, 148 N. E. 831.

ant, held properly denied.-Commonwealth v.

Corcoran, 148 N. E. 123, (H) Documentary Evidence and Exclusion

of Parol Evidence Thereby. ww 429(2) (Mass.) Records of district court

(G) Necessity, Requisites, and Sufficiency

of instructions. in abortion charge held inadmissible.-Common-m778(4) (111.) Requested instruction on prewealth v. Nason, 148 N. E. 110. cm 440 (Mass.) Refusal of court to approve sumption of innocence held properly refused, as defendant's request to War Department to in- argumentative and obscure.-People v. John. spect war record of state witness held not er

son, 148 N. E. 255. ror.–Commonwealth v. Gettigan, 148 N. E.

Requested instruction on presumption of in113.

nocence held properly refused, as argumenta

tive.--Id. (J) Testimony of Accomplices and Code-w780(1) (III.) Refusal to instruct accomplice fendants.

testimony is subject to grave suspicion held C508(1) (Ind.) Testimony of accomplice is error.-People v. Johnson, 148 N. E. 255. competent.-Blum v. State, 148 N. E. 193.

789(17) (III.) Instruction reasonable m508(9) (III.) Accomplice testimony should doubt held erroneous.--People v. Johnson, 148 be acted on with great caution.-People v.

N. E. 255. Johnson, 148 N. E. 255.

ww789(18) (11.) Instruction that reasonable 508 (9) (Ind.) Testimony of accomplice is doubt as to any particular fact in case is not competent, and, if believed, will sustain a ver sufficient to justify acquittal held erroneous.-dict.-Blum v. State, 148 N. E. 193.

People v. Johnson, 148 V. E. 255. 510 (III.) Conviction may be had on uncor

Ow809 (Ind.) Charge to consider only one roborated accomplice testimony where defend

count of affidavit held not erroneous as misleadant's guilt established beyond reasonable doubt. ing jury into believing it was evidence of facts --People v. Johnson, 148 N. E. 255.

averred.-Berry v. State, 148 N. E. 143.

Cam 811 (2) (Mass.) Court need not charge on (K) Confessions.

particular parts of evidence affecting defend519(5) (N.Y.) Accused's

ant's conduct and statements.-Commonwealth

testimony cross-examination, as to having pleaded guilty m811(5) (Ohio) Refusal of special request,

v. Corcoran, 148 N. E. 123. to larceny, held admissible, as evidence of con- singling out witnesses and stating their testi fession. People v. Steinmetz, 148 N. E. 597. 528 (111.) Admission of codefendants' writ- ity being sutlicient.-Curtis v. State, 148 x. E.

mony, held without error; charge on credibil

. ten statements in evidence over defendant's ob

834. jection held erroneous.--People v. Stover, 148 CM 814(13) (111.) Requested instruction N. E. 67. C528 (Mass.) Admission of alleged confes- presumption of innocence held properly refused, sion of one defendant against that defendant | N. E. 255.

as without foundation.--People v. Johnson, 148 only, with question of its voluntary character reserved for jury, not error.-Commonwealth v.

(H) Requests for Instructions. Corcoran, 148 N. E. 123.

825(1) (Ind.) Defendant, not requesting XII. TRIAL,

fuller instruction, cannot complain of incom

plete charge.-Berry v. State, 148 N. E. 143. (B) Course and Conduct of Trial in Gen.

Cm829(1)(Mass.) Denial of requested in

structions covered by others given not error.633(1) (III.) Defendant entitled to fair and Commonwealth v. Corcoran, 148 N. E. 123, impartial trial on evidence, free from attempt Cm829(4) (Mass.) Request that if, at time to wrongfully prejudice jury against him.-Peo

came to defendants, fætus was dead, ple v. Black, 148 N. E. 281.

defendants' removal thereof would not be pf








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

and Reservation fense rightly refused.-Commonwealth v. Na- |(B) Presentation

Lower Court of Grounds of Review. son, 148 N. E. 110.

ww830 (10.) Requested instruction held prop 1030(2). (III.) Constitutional question not erly refused, as argumentative, though correct raised in trial court not considered.-People v. in part.-People v. Johnson, 148 N. E. 255. Blenz, 148 N. E. 249.

Omos 1044 (III.) Defects not raised by writ1J) Custody, Conduct, and Deliberations

ten motion to quash not considered.-People v. of Jury.

Vannier, 148 N. E. 303. m858(3) (Ind.) Jury may be permitted Om 1048 (N.Y.) Review of Court of Appeals is take all counts of indictment or affidavit with limited to questions raised by proper exception. them on retirement, though prosecutor elected - People v. Steinmetz, 148 N. E. 597. to stand on parts only.--Berry v. State, 148 N. E. 143.

(D) Record and Proceedings Not in Rec(K) Verdict.

ord. Cm878(2) (11.) Judgment and sentence on

m 1090(8) (III.) Errors in admission and exgeneral verdict under indictment in two counts clusion of evidence and weight of evidence canproper, if evidence supported either count.-

not be reviewed in absence of bill of exceptions. People v. Goldman, 148 N. E. 873.

-People v. Ditto, 148 N. E. 255. ww878(2) (Ind.) General verdict of guilty em 1090(8) (ind.) Where evidence heard by construed as being on offense proved, where court on motion to suppress testimony is not only one was proved.-Meno v. State, 148 N. contained in bill of exceptions, ņo question as E. 420.

to correctness of court's ruling is presented.

Guetling v. State, 148 N. E. 146. XIII. MOTIONS FOR NEW TRIAL AND IN

Om 1090(14) (III.) Errors in giving of instrucARREST.

tions cannot be reviewed in absence of bill of On918(3) (Mass.) Denial of motion for new exceptions.--People v. Ditto, 148 N. E. 257. trial on ground that state bad exercised more Om 1090 (19) (ind.), Errors in trial not conperemptory challenges than it was entitled to, sidered, except as shown in record and bill of having knowledge that one defendant was to exceptions.-Blum v. State, 148 N. E. 193. plead guilty, held not error.-Commonwealth v. em 1090(19), (Ind.) Supreme Court cannot act Corcoran, 148 N. E. 123.

on unauthenticated reporter's copy of evidence. ww919(3) (Mass.) Denial of new trial -Shoemaker v. State, 148 N. E. 403. ground of prejudice of defendants' rights from all 10() (Mass.) Defendant pot presentstatements in another case, overheard by jury, ing himself for sentence cannot invoke law to held not error.-Commonwealth v. Corcoran, | correct errors in record.-Cherry v. Cherry, 148 N. E. 123.

148 N. E. 570. Ci 925 (5) (Mass.) Denial of new trial onem | 120(1) (Ind.) Whether prejudicial error ground of intimidation of jurors held not error. was committed in admitting and excluding tes-Commonwealth v. Corcoran, 148 N. E. 123. timony certified not considered, where all eviw938(1). (Mass.) Motion for new trial on dence was not brought up.--Shoemaker v. State, ground of newly discovered evidence is ad- | 148 N. E. 403. dressed to sound judicial discretion of presiding om 1124(1) (Mass.) Denial of motion for new judge.-Commonwealth v. Gettigan, 148 N. E. trial on particular ground held not reversible, in 113.

absence of showing of facts on which defendCm957() (ind.) Juror not permitted to im ants relied.-Commonwealth v. Corcoran, 148 peach verdict in support of motion for new trial. N. E. 123. -Meno v, State, 148 N. E. 420.

(G) Review. XIV. JUDGMENT, SENTENCE, AND FINALM1134(1) (11.) Object of review of judgCOMMITMENT,

ments of trial courts stated.--People v. Skov980(2) (Ohio) Trial court's finding of ac

r, 148 N. E. 67. cused guilty of first degree without extension of Cw1144(4) (N.Y.) Court of Appeals must mercy held not abuse of discretion.-State v. compliance with statutes pertaining to taking of

presume, in absence of evidence to contrary, Ferranto, 148 N. E. 362.

1001 '(ill.) Determination of trial court on defendant's plea of guilty. People v. Steinquestion of probation is matter of discretion.- metz, 148 N. E. 597. People v. Stover, 148 N. E. 67.

ww1144 (13), (ind.) Rule in determining whethCmw 1001 (Ind.) Suspension of judgment

er evidence is sufficient to sustain conviction sentence and parole does not suspend opera

stated.-Shine v. State, 148 N. E. 411. tion of final judgment beyond term of impris

Om 1144 (14) (ind.) Instructions presumed onment fixed, thereby.-Rode v. Baird, 148 N. proper in absence of contrary showing.-Blum E. 406.

v. State, 148 N. E. 193. Purpose of statute authorizing court to sus

el 147 (III.) Determination of trial court on pend sentence and parole persons convicted. I question of probation not reviewed. People v. stated.-Id.

Stoyer, 148 N. E. 67. One out on parole is under supervision of offi- amar! 149 (Ohio) Court's action in permitting cer or some discreet person in counties having withdrawal of plea of not guilty and accepting no probation officer or clerk.-Id.

plea of guilty not reversed unless discretion One complying with terms of parole fixed by abused.--State v. Ferranto, 148 N. E. 362. court on conviction of misdemeanor not requir- is admitted rests in discretion of trial judge

ww1 153(3) (Mass.) Order in which evidence ed to submit to latter's observation beyond term of imprisonment fixed by judgment.-Id.

to the exercise of which discretion no exception Revocation of order suspending sentence or

lies.--Commonwealth v. Corcoran, 148 N. E. granting parole without notice after term of w1153(4) (Mass.) Extent of cross-examipa.

123, imprisonment fixed by judgment not authorized tion matter largely within discretion of court, by statute.-Id.

and not open to revision, unless rights clearly XV. APPEAL AND ERROR, AND

prejudiced.-Commonwealth v. Corcoran, 148 CERTIORARI,

N. E. 123.

Om 1156 (3) '(Mass.) Motion for new trial on (A) Form of Remedy, Jurisdiction, and ground of newly discovered evidence is adRight of Review.

dressed to sound judicial discretion of presiding Om 1023(2) (Mass.) Writ of

lies in judge, to exercise of which no exception lies.criminal case only after final judgment.-Cher-Commonwealth v. Gettigan, 148 N. E. 113. ry v. Cherry, 148 N. E. 570.

Om 1160 (Ind.) Conviction not reviewed if Sentence temporarily suspended or delayed there is any evidence to support verdict.-Lowis not "final judgment."-Id.

ery v. State, 148 N. E. 197.



Com 1165(1) (III.) Defendant, proved guilty by used in computation in action for damages.his undenied confession, cannot complain of General Supply & Construction Co. v. Goelet, trial error where verdict does not fix penalty or 148 N. E. 778. grade of crime.-People v. Stover, 148 N. E. Sme 124 (2) (Ind.App.) Measure of damages, if 67.

defendant was not warranted in canceling conCw1165(1)(Ind.) Errors not prejudicing de-tracts for erection and rental of advertising fendant's substantial rights disregarded.-Meno boards for plaintiff's breach, stated.–Gibson Co. v. State, 148 N. E. 420.

v. Morton, 148 N. E. 430. Cw1167(2) (N.Y.) Error in sustaining defec- E 124(3) (Ind.App.), Plaintiff entitled to retive counts of indictment for obtaining money cover for freight paid on boards returned to by false pretenses should not be disregarded, point of origin, if defendant not warranted in unless there is evidence sustaining inconsistent canceling contracts.-Gibson Co. v. Morton, 148 counts and justifying inference that allegations N. E. 430. thereof were accepted by jury.-People v. Werblow, 148 N. E. 786.


SESSMENT. ml 169(1) (Mass.) Admission of testimony as to statements made by deceased's sister,

(B) Evidence. having but little relevancy, held not 191 (Ind.App.) Plaintiff not entitled to re-Commonwealth v. Gettigan, 148 N. E. 113.

cover, as damages for breach of contract, deCi 1169(2) (III.) Reversal for insufficiency of murrage and storage on advertising boards reevidence not warranted, unless well-founded turned to point of origin.-Gibson Co. v. Morton, doubt of accused's guilt.–People v. Goldman, 148 N. E. 430. 148 N. E. 873.

1169(7) (III.) Admission of codefendants' (C) Proceedings for Assessment. written statements in evidence held without 218 (Ind.App.) Instructions on measure of prejudice to defendant.-People v. Stover, 148 damages held erroneous and not to give jury N. E. 67.

any proper basis for ascertaining amount of cm 117012(2) (Mass.) Answer of witness to recovery, Gibson Co. v. Morton, 148 N. E. question as to whether it had not occurred to 430. her that the woman had had miscarriage held without prejudice.-Commonwealth v. Nason, (D) Computation and Amount, Double and 148 N. E. 110.

Treble Damages, and Remission. 1172(1) (Ind.) Instructions held harmless, 228 (Ind.App.) Remittitur held without auin view of conclusive evidence of guilt.-Meno thority of law.–People's State Bank of Indianv. State, 148 N. E. 420.

apolis v. Hall, 148 N. E. 486. w 1177 (Ind.) General verdict conclusively presumed to be on good count, and overruling

DEATH. motion in arrest harmless error.-Meno v. State, 148 N. E. 420.

II. ACTIONS FOR CAUSING DEATH. Om | 178 (Ind.) Objections to evidence not set

(D) Pleading and Evidence. out in appellant's brief not considered.-Meno Om64 (III.) That deceased was laboring man, v. State, 148 N. E. 420.

not hobo, held proper matter for consideration em 1179 (111.) On error to Appellate Court, in estimating damages. - Bremer v. Lake Erie Supreme Court will consider only points raised & W. R. Co., 148 N. E. 862. and decided by Appellate Court.-People v. Garwood, 148 N. E. 259.

(E) Damages, Forfeiture, or Fine. em 1179'(N.Y.) Unanimous affirmance by Apoc99(4) (Ind.App.) $17,500 for death of fire. pellate Division enforces on Court of Appeals man held not excessive.-Baltimore & 0. S. W. presumption that supporting evidence exists, if R, Co. v. Hill, 148 N. E. 489. indictment is sufficient. People v. Werblow, 148 N. E. 786.

DEDICATION. In view of contradictory counts of indictment, Court of Appeals should search record

I. NATURE AND REQUISITES. to determine whether accused was aggrieved On 20(3) (111.) Alley held public alley, when by denial of motion to dismiss defective counts. used by public for 15 years.-Rippinger v. Nied-Id.

erst, 148 N. E. 7. Evidence may be examined on appeal despite unanimous aflirmance by lower court, so far as

DEEDS. necessary to determine materiality of error.

See Mortgages. Id.

III. CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION. (H) Determination and Disposition of(F) Loss or Relinquishment of Rights. Cause.

Om 181 (III.) Grantee, in whom title vests by 1182 (ill.) Judgment of trial court af- delivery of deed, cannot divest himself of title firmed, where bill of exceptions has been strick- by alteration or destruction of deed.-Standard en, and no error is assigned on the record. Trust & Savings Bank v. Fernow, 148 N. E. 37. People v. Lucor, 148 N. E. 243.

Insertion of word “Junior," after name of

original grantee, with knowledge and consent CUSTOMS AND USAGES.

of all parties, held not to vest title in substiOm8 (Ind.) Custom of court reporters, as to

tuted grantee.-Id. preparing bills of exceptions, would not prevail IV. PLEADING AND EVIDENCE. over statute.--Washington Hotel Realty Co. v.

held sufficient to Bedford Stone & Construction Co., 148 N. E. (ww 186 (111.) Allegations 405.

show fraud and want of delivery of deed.-PenC 15(2), (N.Y.) Standard meaning of word kala v. Tomczyk, 148 N. E. 64.

held sufficient “factor" includes selling agent, but different w 188 (III.) Allegations meaning by general usage and understanding show fraud and want of delivery of deed.-Penand practical construction may be shown.

kala v. Tomczyk, 148 N. E. 64.
Shoyer v. Edmund Wright-Ginsberg Co., 148 N.
E. 328.


Co 10 (Ind.App.) Not liable for payments on

city controller's orders based on claims, allowVI. MEASURE OF DAMAGES.

ances of which were obtained by city ein

ployee's fraud.---City of Indianapolis v. Xation(C) Breach of Contract.

al City Bank of Indianapolis, 118 N. E. 675. Co 122 (N.Y.) Stipulated amount for each Liable for payments negligently made to ficduy's delay for completion of contract must be titious persons on orders made by city con




For cases in Dec.Dig. & Am.Dig. Key-No.Series & Indexes see same topic and KEY-NUMBER troller in belief he was making them payable to IV. JURISDICTION, PROCEEDINGS, AND real persons; "checks"; "negotiable instru

RELIEF. ments."-Id.

(A) Jurisdiction, Venue, and Limitations. ll (Ind.App.) Evidence held insufficient to w62(2) (N.Y.) Nonresident husband cannot depository were forged.--City of Indianapolis sue for separation.-Finlay v. Finlay, 148 N.

E. 624. v. National City Bank of Indianapolis, 148 N.

(C) Pleading. E. 675.

Report to state examiner of public accounts www 104 (111.). Denial of amendment changing hela inadmissible in city's action for sums paid nature of action not abuse of discretion, where on warrants to fictitious persons.--Id.

motion therefor first made after decision on Question whether persons whom witness in merits.-Soltysik v. Soltysik, 148 N. E. 40. vestigated had indorsed names on warrants to alleged fictitious persons held improper.-Id.

(G) Appeal. City directory held inadmissible to prove non-eww 181 (N.Y.) Statute providing for appeal residence of alleged fictitious person.-Id.

from order granting new trial held inapplica

ble in suit for absolute divorce.-Friedman y. DEPOSITIONS.

Friedman, 148 N. E: 725. Em 65 (Mass.) Cross-interrogatories

Om 184(2) (N.Y.) Joinder of child sought to

to whether maker of note tendered merchandise of by plaintiff.-Stillman v. Stillman, 148 N. E.

be declared illegitimate cannot be complained to payee and details thereof properly admitted.

518. -Banca Italiana Di Sconto v. Columbia Counter Co., 148 N. E. 105.

V. ALIMONY, ALLOWANCES, AND DISPOObjection to cross-interrogatory, on ground

SITION OF PROPERTY. that delivery of note in suit was assumed, not

240(2) (II.) Equitable rights of parties sustained.-Id.

to divorce suit first question for determination DESCENT AND DISTRIBUTION.

in decreeing alimony.-Soltysik v. Soltysik, 148

N. E. 40. See Executors and Administrators; Wills. On 252 (111.) Equitable rights of parties to di

vorce suit first question for determination in 1. NATURE AND COURSE


settling property rights.-Soltysik v. Soltysik, Om 17 (!!l.) Remainder after widow's death 148 N. È. 40. held not devised in contingency which happened. Real estate acquired by joint efforts of hus-Pontius v. Conrad, 148 N. E. 17.

band and wife, and purchased with common

funds, properly divided equally between them, II. PERSONS ENTITLED AND THEIR RE--Id. SPECTIVE SHARES.

emm 253 (III.) Wife collecting rents from prop(B) Surviving Husband or Wife. erty owned jointly by her and husband and apOw62 (Ohio) Contract, in contemplation of plying them to taxes, repairs, etc., not reseparation, to release dower and distributive quired to account to husband for one-half share, permitted under statute.-Hoagland v. Soltysik, 148 N. E. 40.

thereof prior to decree of division.-Soltysik v. Hoagland, 148 N. E. 585. Husband and wife may enter engagement mu- did not change character of debt.-Gilchrist v.

Omw271 (Ind.App.) Taking of second judgment tually releasing dower and distributive share in each other's property and contract for fu- Cotton, 148 N. E. 435. ture support of either of them or their chil


CHILDREN. Rule, that mere expectancy or chance of heirship is not subject to release, does not apply to Cm 294 (N.Y.), Jurisdiction not retained to adhusband and wife's release of dower and dis-aration refused.--Finlay v. Finlay, 148 N. E.

judicate custody of children if divorce or septributive share.-Id.


302 (N.Y.) Decree held to dispose only of HEIRS AND DISTRIBUTEES.

custody of child as between husband and wife. (A) Nature and Establishment of Rights - In re Thorne, 148 N. E. 630. in General.

Judgment held not conclusive that wife was

unfit to be appointed guardian.-Id. 92 (Ill.) Suit by heirs of testatrix to determine their interest adversely to possible un

DOCKS. born persons held not maintainable; "unknown See Wharves. owners;"_"unknown heirs or devisees.”—Morti

DOMICILE. more v. Bashore, 148 N, E. 317.

O4(1) (N.Y.) Infant cannot choose a resi. DISCOVERY.

dence.--In re Thorne, 148 N. E. 630. II. UNDER STATUTORY PROVISIONS.

Omm 5 (ind. App.) Child's residence follows that (A) Interrogatories and Examinations of 148 N. E. 163.

of guardian having legal custody.-In re Perry, Parties and of Other Persons.

Cum 5 (N.Y.) Legal domicile of child with that Cu 41 (N.Y.) Whether examination of adverse of father, though living apart from him.-In re party in tort action should be limited to certain Thorne, 148 N. E. 630. matter held discretionary with trial court. Domicile of infant becomes that of mother Middleton v. Boardman, 148 N. E. 701.

on death of father.--Id. Cam79 (Mass.) Identity of matters inquired Generally, infant has no legal residence of his about held sufficient to allow admission of an- own.-Id. swers to interrogatories.--Bradley Lumber & Residence of infant may be either that of Mfg. Co. v. Cutler, 148 N. E. 101.

father or mother, and, if infant lives with

mother, her domicile is his.--Id. DISMISSAL AND NONSUIT,

See Appeal and Error, w782-791.


(A) Rights and Remedies of Wife. II. GROUNDS.

36 (N.Y.) Since right of wife of defendant m27(1) (N.Y.) Adultery not necessarily in partition to dower abated at her death, where cruel and inhuman treatment, nor indicative she took no proceedings to withdraw fund, of permanent abandonment.-Lanyon's Detec- right thereto likewise abated.-Youngs v. Goodtive Agency v. Cochrane, 148 N. E. 520. man, 148 N. E. 639.


« ForrigeFortsett »