2. Contracts enforceable.

Defendant, for an expressed consideration of $1, agreed to convey to complainant a one-fifth interest in any and all property which he should acquire either by location, purchase, or otherwise in the territory of Alaska. In his bill, complainant alleged that the real consideration for the agreement was the cancellation of an indebtedness due him from defendant and cash advanced, amounting in all to about $12,000; also that defendant had acquired certain property in Alaska, by location, purchase, and otherwise, exceeding in value $750,000; and prayed for a decree for specific performance. Held that, there being no limit in the contract as to the time or manner of acquisition of the property or as to its character or value, the contract was inequitable and would not be specifically enforced, especially in view of the gross inadequacy of the consideration as disclosed by the bill.

-Marks v. Gates, 154 Fed. 481.....

.83 C. C. A. 321

A contract may be perfectly legal, and yet a court of equity will not enforce specific performance if it is unreasonable or unconscientious or if its enforcement will work a hardship or injustice to one of the parties, but will leave the parties to their remedies at law.

-Marks v. Gates, 154 Fed. 481.....

..83 C. C. A. 321

It was no defense to a suit for the performance of an executory agreement of which an executed agreement was the consideration that a trustee to whom defendant was to convey certain stock had failed to render services to promote the corporation as agreed; his contract in that regard being incidental to the main purpose of the agreement, and not going to its whole consideration.

-Howe v. Howe & Owen Ball Bearing Co., 154 Fed. 820..

SPEED.

of vessel in collision, see "Collision," § 3.

SPLITTING CAUSES OF ACTION.

See "Action," § 1.

83 C. C. A. 536

STATES.

Adoption by United States courts of practice of state courts, see "Courts," § 3. Courts, see "Courts."

State laws affecting patents, see "Patents," § 1.

STATUTES.

Adoption by United States courts of state laws as rules of decision, see "Courts," § 3.

Provisions relating to particular subjects.

See "Attorney and Client," § 1; "Bankruptcy," § 1; "Collision," §§ 1, 4; "Copyrights," § 1; "Corporations," §§ 3, 5; "Criminal Law," §§ 1, 2; "Customs Duties"; "Death," § 1; "Habeas Corpus," § 1; "Judicial Sales"; "Master and Servant," §§ 1, 2; "Monopolies," § 1; "Municipal Corporations," § 2; "Navigable Waters," § 1; "Patents," § 4; "Pleading," § 1; "Post Office," § 1; "Public Lands," § 1; "Railroads," § 2; "Shipping," §§ 4, 5; "Wills," § 1. Statute of frauds, see "Frauds, Statute of."

83 C.C.A.-49

Errors noted on appeal or error without assignment, see "Appeal and Error," $ 6.

Computation of under insurance policy, see "Insurance," § 1.

For filing petition to revise in bankruptcy proceedings, see "Bankruptcy," § 4. For payment of interest, see "Interest," § 1.

For taking appeal or suing out writ of error, see "Appeal and Error," § 4. For vacation of judgment, see "Judgment," § 1.

Effect of sale, see "Sales."

To patents, see "Patents," § 4.
To vessel, see "Shipping," § 1.

TITLE.

TORTS.

Causing death, see "Death," § 1.

Liabilities of particular classes of persons.

See "Municipal Corporations,” § 2.

Particular torts.

See "Libel and Slander"; "Negligence"; "Trover and Conversion."
Maritime torts, see "Collision."

Remedies for torts.

Measure of damages, see "Damages," § 1.

TOWAGE.

Collisions with tugs and vessels in tow, see "Collision," § 3.

Evidence held to support the finding of the trial court that the leaking of a barge in tow which made it necessary to abandon her did not result from her grounding through the fault of the tug, but that it was due to her unseaworthy condition; and the tug also held not in fault for not sooner going in search of the barge after her crew had been taken off and she had gone adrift at sea in the night, in view of the belief of all parties that she had foundered.

-The Asher J. Hudson, 154 Fed. 354...

See "Municipal Corporations."

TOWNS.

TRADE-MARKS AND TRADE-NAMES.

§ 1. Infringement and unfair competition.

.83 C. C. A. 143

A manufacturer of locks who deliberately and intentionally copied a higher-priced lock made by another manufacturer in form, size, coloring, lettering, and details of finish, so that the two were substantially identical in appearance to a casual observer, and retail purchasers were likely to mistake one for the other, is chargeable with unfair competition, although the parts of the lock separately may have been open to his appropriation. -Yale & Towne Mfg. Co. v. Alder, 154 Fed. 37.....83 C. C. A. 149

TRIAL.

Presumptions on appeal or writ of error as to rulings, see "Appeal and Error,"
§ 8.
Waiver of errors in rulings by failure to except in trial court, see "Appeal and
Error," § 3.

Trial of actions by or against particular classes of persons.

See "Municipal Corporations," § 2.

Trial of particular civil actions or proceedings.

See "Negligence," § 1.

For causing death in general, see "Death," § 1.
For death of servant, see "Master and Servant," § 2.