For cases in Dec.Dig. & Am.Dig. Key-No.Series & Indexes see same topic and KEY-NUMBER tent to revoke will as originally made.-Cant- Presumption that destruction by heir was 292 (III.) Source of testatrix's title held 294 (III.) Competency of attesting witness- Sustaining objection to question, answer to VI. CONSTRUCTION. 440 (Mass.) Intention as disclosed by will 441 (111) Main object in construing will is 297 (3) (III.) Declarations of testator com- 302 (5) (III.) That will contains perfect at 303(2)(III.) Execution and competency of 441 (Ind.App.) Testator's intent given ef- 449 (Ind.) Testator held to have disposed 449 (Mass.) Intent to dispose of all prop- 802. 450 (Ind.App.) Construction giving effect Subscribing witnesses' oath as to belief that Witnesses must swear to belief, at time of 305.) Rule as to competency of decla- 306 (111.) Will with name following "my Evidence held insufficient to prove name of 316(2) (Mass.) Issue of testamentary ca- taken from will changing meaning of testator 455 (Ind.App.) That will is crudely drawn Intention controls words, and not words in- To effectuate intent courts may transpose, 456 (Ind.App.) Words given their usual 456 (Ind.App.) Words used in inexact and 470 (1.) Interpreted as a whole.-Cales v. 470 (Ind.App.) Will construed as whole to 316(3) (Mass.) Granting issue of undue in-471 (III.) Manner of construing will con- E. 692. 317 (Mass.) Refusal to frame issue for tri- 324 (3) (Ind.) Evidence of undue influence 146 N. E. 577. 324(4) (II.) Due execution of will held for 330(1) (II.) Instruction as to mental com- N. E. 536. 472 (Ind.App.) The posterior of conflicting 473 (III.) Manner of construing will con- 477 (Mass.) Testatrix's will held to create 146487 (I) (I.) Extrinsic evidence not admis- 333 (Ind.) Verdict for contestants not set (K) Review. 400 (III.) Decree dismissing contest on Instruction on burden of proof held not harm- Instruction submitting legal question wheth- (B) Designation of Devisees, and Lega- 497 (1) (Ind.App.) Words "child" and Word "children" not construed as embracing 497 (5) (Ind.App.) Adopted child not in- Adopted child of testator included in devise Adopted child held not included in devise to 635 (Ind.) Uniting of estates in possession children.-Id. and remainder, held to vest fee, subject to con498 (Mass.) Adopted children not "issue," tingency.-Burrell v. Jean, 146 N. E. 754. within provisions of will creating trust.-Galla-637 (III.) Devise construed to give first gher v. Sullivan, 146 N. E. 769. taker life estate with alternative contingent remainders, and to vest reversion in fee in heirs of testatrix.-Fuller v. Fuller, 146 N. E. 174. Vesting of reversion in fee not affected by fact that life tenant was also reversioner.-Id. 523 (Mass.) Gift of residue to several legatees named, to be divided equally, is gift to them as individuals.-Hobbs v. Chesley, 146 N. E. 261. 529 (Ind.App.) Devise to testator's adopted daughter, brothers and sisters, and heirs of deceased brothers construed.-Billings v. Deputy, 146 N. E. 219. (H) Estates in Trust and Powers. 534 (Mass.) Existence of life estate in tes-675 (Mass.) Gift to legatee held subject to tatrix's daughter held not to deprive her of precatory trust to charity; "will and wish."vested remainder.-Hedge v. State St. Trust Temple v. Russell, 146 N. E. 679. Co., 146 N. E. 802. Will creating life estate with remainder to testatrix's three children held to create vested interest in such children, though one of them was life tenant.-Id. (D) Description of Property. 692, 693 (5) (III.) Life tenant given power to sell could not cut off remainder by conveying land to grantee, who immediately reconveyed to life tenant.-Cales v. Dressler, 146 N. E. 162. Life tenant, with power of sale, could convey land reserving right to use in consideration of services to be rendered.-Id., 561 (2) (III.) Devise of hotel held to carry with it land adjacent thereto and used in VII. RIGHTS AND LIABILITIES OF DEVconnection therewith.-Fuller v. Fuller, 146 ISEES AND LEGATEES. N. E. 174. (C) Advancements, Ademption, Satisfaction, and Lapse. 758 (1.) Statute as to advancements inapplicable in suit for partition by devisees.Alward v. Woodard, 146 N. E. 154. 759(1)(III.) Testator may make more favorable provision in will than provided for by prior advancement.-Alward v. Woodard, 146 N. E. 154. 601(2)(III.) Will held to give testator's wife merely life estate with power to sell.-759 (3) (II.) Provision in will for deducCales v. Dressler, 146 N. E. 162. tion of "advancements" enforced.-Alward v. Woodard, 146 N. E. 154. 610(2) (Mass.) Testatrix intended to create life interest, with power in legatee to consume and dispose of.-King v. Walsh, 146 N. E. 33. 760 (III.) Value of land advanced determined as of date of possession by child.-Alward v. Woodard, 146 N. E. 154. 616(4) (III.) Gift over after life estate not 761 (III.) Parol evidence admissible to deinvalid because of uncertainty of quantity of termine amount of advancement to be deducted. residuary estate.-Cales v. Dressler, 146 N. E.-Alward v. Woodard, 146 N. E. 154. 162. Agreement at time of advancement provable, where later will provided for deductions for (F) Vested or Contingent Estates and In- advancements.-Id. terests. 629 (Ind.) Postponing estates disfavored.Burrell v. Jean, 146 N. E. 754. Will providing for deductions for advancements admissible to prove testator's final intention. Id. Remainders will be regarded as vested, rath-775 (Mass.) Legacy to one of class of leger than contingent or conditional, so as to avoid atees lapses, if legatee predeceases testator.possibility of partial intestacy.-Id. Hobbs v. Chesley, 146 N. E. 261. (D) Election. 629 (Ind.App.) Where testator created contingent remainder by unambiguous language, court must uphold it.-Hackleman v. Hackle-781 (III.) Provision in will as to deductions man. 146 N. E. 590. for advancement, held to govern prior agree629 (Mass.) Law favors vested rather than ment.-Alward v. Woodard, 146 N. E. 154. contingent estates in construction of wills.800 (Ill.) Devisee cannot take under will Hedge v. State St. Trust Co., 146 N. E. 802. and dispute advancement.-Alward v. Woodard, 634 (9) (II.) Devise to heirs of body of 146 N. E. 154. life tenant held contingent until birth of heir Beneficiaries must accept will in its entirety. and destructible by merger of estates.-Fuller-Id. v. Fuller, 146 N. E. 174. Devise construed to create estate in legal (H) Void, Lapsed, and Forfeited Devises heirs of testatrix to take effect only in case estate in heirs of body of life tenant did not. -Id. Devise construed to give first taker life estate with alternate contingent remainders.-Id. 634 (12) (Ind.App.) Will held to create a contingent remainder in testator's children living at death of wife.-Hackleman v. Hackleman. 146 N. E. 590. and Bequests, and Property and Interests Undisposed of. 858(1) (Mass.) Residuary estate held not intended to go to nephews as a class.-Hobbs v. Chesley, 146 N. E. 261. See Evidence. WITNESSES. II. COMPETENCY. 634 (17) (Ind.) Devise to daughter for life. and after her death to her children, held to vest remainder in child living at testator's death. (A) Capacity and Qualifications in GenBurrell v. Jean, 146 N. E. 754. 634(18) (Ind.) Devise held to vest determinable remainder in heirs, as purchasers, contingent on one of two happenings.-Burrell v. Jean. 146 N. E. 754. 634(19) (Ind.) Word "after" in devise to one for life, and after her death, to others, held to pertain to time of enjoyment, not time of vesting.-Burrell v. Jean, 146 N. E. 754. eral. 40(2) (III.) Competency of small child discretionary with court.-People v. Schladweiler, 146 N. E. 525. Admission of testimony of small children held not abuse of discretion.-Id. 44 (.) Test as to competency of small child stated.-People v. Schladweiler, 146 N. E. 525. For cases in Dec.Dig. & Am.Dig. Key-No.Series & Indexes see same topic and KEY-NUMBER (C) Testimony of Parties or Persons In- 267 (Ind.) Extent of cross-examination terested, for or against Representa- permitted is within sound discretion of trial tives, Survivors, or Successors in Title or Interest of Persons Deceased court.-Henry v. State, 146 N. E. 822. or Incompetent. 268(2) (Ind.) Unfavorable inference, drawn from facts elicited from witness, opens door 139 (9) (II.) Parties in partition, not suing for admission on cross-examination of knowlas heirs, not incompetent as parties in inter- edge of witness tending to rebut such inferest.-Alward v. Woodard, 146 N. E. 154. ence. Henry v. State, 146 N. E. 822. 140(2) (11.) Interest disqualifying witness 269(1) (Ind.) Opening of subject on must be such that pecuniary gain or loss will amination in chief opens it to full and detailed result from judgment or decree.-Britt v. Darinvestigation on cross-examination.-Henry nell, 146 N. E. 510. State, 146 N. E. 822. Attorney for executor held not disqualified to testify for him by interest in litigation.-Id. 140 (9) (III.) Husband of testatrix's heir held incompetent to testify for contestants.Britt v. Darnell, 146 N. E. 510. 149(2) (III.) Devisees suing in partition incompetent as to conservator for one of defendants.-Alward v. Woodard, 146 N. E. 154. 149(2) (III.) Grantee, son of deceased grantor, is not competent witness for himself, in action by grantor's executor to set aside deed.-Standard Trust & Savings Bank Carlson, 146 N. E. 446. V. 150(3) (Ill.) Devisees in suit for partition cannot dispute rights under will of other devisees. Alward v. Woodard, 146 N. E. 154. Devisees competent to testify as to agreement and declarations of father when making advancement to son.-Id. ex v. 271 (3) (Mass.) Exception to refusal to permit letters to be read in evidence not well taken.-Hall v. Kotowski, 146 N. E. 717. 276 (Mass.) Permitting cross-examination of defendant as adverse witness as to statements made by chauffeur held not abuse of discretion. Walsh v. Feinstein, 146 N. E. 355. Cross-examination of party called as witness rests in court's discretion.-Id. 159(2) (11.) Coheir, suing in partition, not (D) Inconsistent Statements by Witness. competent witness as to his release of expect-379 (2) (Mass.) Evidence of inconsistent ancy.-Alward v. Woodard, 146 N. E. 154. (D) Confidential Relations and Privileged Communications. 221 (Ohio) When husband waived statute prohibiting privileged testimony, stated.-Ruch v. State, 146 N. E. 67. III. EXAMINATION. statements by commonwealth's witnesses as eyewitnesses of killing properly admitted by commonwealth to impeach them.-Common- ' wealth v. Festo, 146 N. E. 700. 388 (10) (Ind.App.) Foundation for impeachment of witness held insufficient.-Hutchens v. State, 146 N. E. 413. WORDS AND PHRASES. "Accident."-Industrial Commission of Ohio v. Russell (Ohio) 146 N. E. 305. (A) Taking Testimony in General. 236(1)(III.) Question if witness knew whether alleged incompetent testatrix had mort-"Action at law."-McBride v. University Club gage on home which she threatened to take away from owner, held permissible.-Britt v. Darnell, 146 N. E. 510. 240(1) (III.) Leading questions to be incompetent must refer to material matters, and occur where no necessity for them appears.People v. Schladweiler, 146 N. E. 525. 240(2) (1.) Whether necessity exists for leading question is largely discretionary with trial court.-People v. Schladweiler, 146 N. E. 525. Abuse of discretion in permitting leading questions prejudicial error.-Id. 240(3) (Ill.) Test as to "leading question" stated.-People v. Schladweiler, 146 N. E. 525. 242 (III.) Questions merely directing attention of witness to subject-matter not suggestive or leading.-People v. Schladweiler, 146 N. E. 525. 243 (III.) Permitting children to answer questions over objections that they were leading held not prejudicial error.-People V. Schladweiler, 146 N. E. 525. 255(1) (II.) Witness may refresh memory by use of written memorandum or entry in book-People v. Krauser, 146 N. E. 593. 257 (.) Permitting reading of stenographic notes of questions to accused at police station, held without error.-People v. Krauser, 146 N. E. 593. (B) Cross-Examination and Re-examina tion. 266 (Ind.) Cross-examination of witness is absolute right, denial of which on material matter is reversible error.-Henry v. State, 146 N. E. 822. Refusal to permit cross-examination as to matters pertaining to investigation of accused's connection with larceny held reversible error. -Id. (Ohio) 146 N. E. 804. "Additional."-People v. Missouri Pac. R. Co. "Advancements."-Alward v. Woodard (Ill.) "All others pursuing like occupations."-City case."-In re Gurnea's Estate N. E. 123. "Children."-Casper v. Helvie (Ind. App.) 146 E. 456. "Conviction."-Commonwealth v. Baldi (Mass.) 146 N. E. 11. "Copy."-People v. Chicago & E. I. Ry. Co. (Ill.) 146 N. E. 499. "Culpable neglect."-Haven v. Smith (Mass.) | "Owner."-Brush v. City of New Bedford 146 N. E. 18. (Mass.) 146 N. E. 9; State v. Davis (Ohio) 146 N. E. 82. "Defect of parties."-Rich v. Fry (Ind.) 146 N. E. 393. "Delivery order."-National Wholesale Grocery Co. v. Mann (Mass.) 146 N. E. 791. "Disability."-Northern Indiana Power Co. v. Hawkins (Ind. App.) 146 N. E. 879. "Drivers, chauffeurs, and riggers."-Palotta's Case (Mass.) 146 N. E. 235. "Embezzlement."-People V. Schrager (Ill.) 146 N. E. 151. "Employer."-Trumbull Cliffs Furnace Co. v. Shachovsky (Ohio) 146 N. E. 306. "Entrails."-Commonwealth v. Cohen (Mass.) 146 N E. 228. "Equitable defenses."-Susquehanna S. S. Co. v. A. O. Andersen & Co. (N. Y.) 146 N. E. 381. "Estates less than freehold."-Fowler v. Marion & Pittsburg Coal Co. (Ill.) 146 N. E. 318. "Estoppel."-General Realty Co. v. Silcox (Ind. App.) 146 N. E. 408., "Extension."-Cleveland, C., C. & St. L. Ry. Co. v. Commerce Commission (Ill.) 146 N. E. 606. "Final decree."-Trebbin v. Thoeresz (Ill.) 146 N. E. 542. "Final judgment."-In re Elm St. in City of New York (N. Y.) 146 N. E. 342. "Freehold estate."-Fowler v. Marion & Pittsburg Coal Co. (Ill.) 146 N. E. 318. "General law."-Hess v. Devou (Ohio) 146 N. E. 311. "Good will."-Jones v. Stevens (Ohio) 146 N. E. 894. "Horse-power."-Foltz Grocery & Baking Co. v. Brown (Ohio) 146 N. E. 97; Fisher Bros. Co. v. Brown (Ohio) 146 N. E. 100. "Immediately."-Hall V. American Bankers' Ins. Co. (Ill.) 146 N. E. 137. "Impairment."-Northern Indiana Power Co. v. Hawkins (Ind. App.) 146 N. E. 879. "Implied powers."-City of Rockford v. Nolan (I.) 146 N. E. 564. "Insurance."-Brownell v. Board of Education of Inside Tax Dist. of City of Saratoga Springs (N. Y.) 146 N. E. 630. "Intent."-People v. Tate (Ill.) 146 N. E. 487. "Interested in estate."-Talbot v. Bush (Mass.) 146 N. E. 223. "Issue."-Gallagher v. Sullivan (Mass.) 146 N. E. 769. "Larceny."-Van Vechten v. American Eagle Fire Ins. Co. (N. Y.) 146 N. E. 432. "Law of the case."-McCracken's Case (Mass.) 146 N. E. 904; Gohman v. City of St. Bernard (Ohio) 146 N. E. 291. "Leading question." People v. Schladweiler (Ill.) 146 N. E. 525. "Licensee."-Pennsylvania R. Co. V. Vitti (Ohio) 146 N. E. 94. "Lien."-State v. Davis (Ohio) 146 N. E. 82. "Liquidated damages."-Miller v. Blockberger (Ohio) 146 N. E. 206; Jones v. Stevens (Ohio) 146 N. E. 894. "Maintenance and repair."-Fisher Bros. Co. v. Brown (Ohio) 146 N. E. 100. "Mandamus."-State v. Nolte (Ohio) 146 N. E. 51. "Marketable title."-McCarty V. Lingham (Ohio) 146 N. E. 64. "Motor transportation company."-Hissem v. Guran (Ohio) 146 N. E. SOS. "Mutual credits."-Putnam v. Handy (Mass.) 146 N. E. 264. "Mutual debts."-Putnam v. Handy (Mass.) 146 N. E. 264. "Nurse."-Phillips v. Buffalo General Hospital (N. Y.) 146 N. E. 199. "Official acts."-American Guaranty Co. v. MeNiece (Ohio) 146 N. E. 77. "Option to renew."-Fuchs v. Peterson (Ill.) 146 N. E. 556. "Orderly."-Phillips v. Buffalo General Hospital (N. Y.) 146 N. E. 199. "Partnership."-Mitchell v. Gruener (Mass.) 146 N. E. 252. "Passenger car."-Fisher Bros. Co. v. Brown (Ohio) 146 N. E. 100. "Passengers."-Pittsburgh, C., C. & St. L. R. Co. v. Jones (Ind. App.) 146 N. E. 864. "Payment."-People v. Westerdahl (Ill.) 146 N. E. 737. "Penalty."-Miller v. Blockberger (Ohio) 146 N. E. 206. "Perjury."-Ruch v. State (Ohio) 146 N. E. 67. "Permanent abode."-Anderson v. Pifer (Ill.) 146 N. E. 171. "Permission of town."-Inhabitants of Canton V. Westbourne Cemetery Corporation of Boston (Mass.) 146 N. Ě. 258. "Person."-Madden V. Board of Election Com'rs of City of Boston (Mass.) 146 N. E. 280. "Proceeding."-Ruch v. State (Ohio) 146 N. E. "Proceeding at law."-Petition of Forbes (Ill.) 146 N. E. 448. 67. "Public officer."-Hodsdon v. Weinstein (Mass.) 146 N. E. 675. "Public utility."-Cleveland, C., C. & St. L. Ry. Co. v. Commerce Commission (Ill.) 146 N. E. 606. "Purpose."-People v. Tate (Ill.) 146 N. E. 487. "Residence."-Anderson v. Pifer (Ill.) 146 N. E. 171. "Res judicata."-Burrell v. Jean (Ind.) 146 N. E. 754; Gohman v. City of St. Bernard (Ohio) 146 N. E. 291. "Resulting trust."-Rolofson v. Malone (Ill.) 146 N. E. 169. "Return."-Maxwell Implement Co. v. Fitzgerald (Ind. App.) 146 N. E. 883. "Same offense."-Duvall v. State (Ohio) 146 N. "Severally."-City of Momence v. Kirby (Ill.) E. 90. 146 N. E. 142. "Some person other than employer."—Artificial Ice & Cold Storage Co. v. Waltz (Ind. App.) 146 N. E. 826. "Soundness of mind."-Needham Trust Co. v. Cookson (Mass.) 146 N. E. 268. "Special assessments."-Carlyle (Ill.) 146 N. E. 192. V. Bartels "Special franchise." People ex rel. New York Cent. R. Co. v. State Tax Commission (N. "Spur track."-Cleveland, C., C. & St. L. Ry. Y.) 146 N. E. 197. Co. v. Commerce Commission (Ill.) 146 N. E. 606. "Subject to."-America Mfg. Co. v. Commonwealth (Mass.) 146 N. E. 801. "Subrogation."-Travelers' Ins. Co. v. Brass Goods Mfg. Co. (N. Y.) 146 N. E. 377. "Suit in equity."-Petition of Forbes (Ill.) 146 N. E. 448. "Taxes."-Carlyle v. Bartels (Ill.) 146 N. E. 192. "Tender."-Maxwell Implement Co. v. Fitzger"Theft."--Van Vechten v. American Eagle Fire ald (Ind. App.) 146 N. E. 883. Ins. Co. (N. Y.) 146 N. E. 432. "Towns."-Decatur v. Auditor of City of Peabody (Mass.) 146 N. E. 360. "Undue influence."-Crane v. Hensler (Ind.) 146 N. E. 577. "Way."-Commonwealth v. Leone (Mass.) 146 N. E. 26. "When."-Commonwealth v. Cohen (Mass.) 146 N. E. 228. V. Cohen "When dressed."-Commonwealth (Mass.) 146 N. E. 228. "Will and wish."-Temple v. Russell (Mass.) 146 N. E. 679. "Willful misconduct."-Durgin's Case (Mass.) 146 N. E. 694. "Wrecking."- Aurnhammer v. Brotherhood Acc. Co. (Mass.) 146 N. E. 47. For cases in Dec.Dig. & Am.Dig. Key-No.Series & Indexes see same topic and KEY-NUMBER WORK AND LABOR. WRIT OF ERROR. 24(2) (N.Y.) Part payment cannot be prov- See Appeal and Error. ed under a general denial.-Curry v. Mackenzie, 146 N. E. 375. WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION ACTS. See Master and Servant, 348-419. WRITS. See Certiorari; Execution; Injunction; Mandamus; Prohibition; Quo Warranto; Replevin. |