land thus taken.-Johnston v. Drainage Dist.
No. 80 of Palo Alto County, 168 N. W. 886.
Code Supp. 1913, § 1989a25, relates to the
value of an old improvement, and requires com-
missioners to classify benefits, and to take
same into consideration, and credit the value
thereof to the parties owning the old improve- See Boundaries, 40.
ment, but does not relate to the value of the
land taken, which under section 1989a6 must
be allowed as a part of the damages to the
owner of the land.-Id.
Where land was taken in a drainage proceed-
ing for a right of way, the presence upon the
land of a private ditch does not deprive owner
of right to compensation for land taken, but
the jury in arriving at the fair value of the
land should consider its condition as affected
by the private ditch, and the question of credit-
ing the owner on account of the ditch is a mat-
ter for the consideration of the commissioners
independent of the fair value of the land ap-
propriated or award of damages.--Id.
See Wills, 782.
ELECTION OF REMEDIES.
15 (Minn.) An action for rescission of a
contract for fraud is not a bar to an action
for damages for the same fraud.-Gunderson
v. Halvorson, 168 N. W. 8.
See Constitutional Law, 9; Elections,
18.
62 (Neb.) In action by a drainage district
to enjoin defendant's ditch on the ground that I. RIGHT OF SUFFRAGE AND REGU-
it would carry silt into plaintiff's main canal LATION THEREOF IN GENERAL.
and fill it to plaintiff's damage, evidence held18 (Iowa) Const. art. 2, § 1, providing that
insufficient to entitle plaintiff to the writ pray- certain males may vote, does not prevent the
ed.-Burt-Washington Drainage Dist. v. Rob- Legislature from giving women the right to vote
in all elections, except where the choice of of-
ficers is involved.-State v. Snyder, 168 N. W.
243.
erts-Rose Ranch Co., 168 N. W. 192.
II. ASSESSMENTS AND SPECIAL
IV. QUALIFICATIONS OF VOTERS.
not authorize women to vote on the question of
organizing a consolidated independent school
district proposed under Code Supp. 1913, §
2794a.-State v. Snyder, 168 N. W. 243.
71 (Iowa) Tile drain which passed over
land of party assessed for cost, and so fur-65 (Iowa) Code 1897, §§ 1131 and 2747, do
nished outlet for lateral tile more accessible
than had it not touched premises, was of some
value to premises, though blue clay covering
tile was impervious to water.-Christenson v.
Board of Sup'rs of Hamilton County, 168 N. W.
114.
72 (Iowa) Lands for the purpose of assess-
ment for drainage purposes are classified upon
a percentage basis without special reference to
the expense of constructing the improvement
across or in the vicinity of any given tract.-
Conklin v. City of Des Moines, 168 N. W. 874.
73 (Iowa) It is of no concern to party as-
sessed for cost of drain, and objecting, if an-
other party enjoyed advantages over others
than himself.-Christenson v. Board of Sup'rs
of Hamilton County, 168 N. W. 114.
74 (Iowa) Where feature of drainage proj-
ect was abandoned through agreement reach-
ed by landowners to which person assess-
ed and objecting was party and at their solici-
tation, such person is not in position to com-
plain of assessment against him on ground of
abandonment.-Christenson v. Board of Sup'rs
of Hamilton County, 168 N. W. 114.
VI. NOMINATIONS AND PRIMARY
126(4) (Mich.) Under Detroit City Charter,
c. 1, tit. 4, subd. E, providing that no elective
officer shall be a candidate for any public of-
fice except to succeed himself, the judge of the
recorder's court, a large share of whose duties
is to take jurisdiction for enforcement of the city
ordinances, is disqualified from being a candi-
date at a primary election for mayor, without
first resigning.-Attorney General v. City Elec-
tion Commission of City of Detroit, 168 N. W.
708.
ELECTRICITY.
See Master and Servant, ~265.
19 (4) (Iowa) An electric company, charged
with negligence in not insulating its power wires
So
as to protect the traveling public, may,
though the statute requires them to be "prop-
erly insulated," show no known substance there-
on will prevent escape of electricity under high
voltage.-Wells v. Chamberlain, 168 N. W. 238.
ELECTRIC LIGHTS.
76 (Mich.) Pub. Acts 1915, No. 176, giv
ing property owners right to have special as-
sessments for drains spread, does not apply to
a tax previously held invalid in a proceeding
wherein the person now seeking enforcement
was a party.-Johnson v. Board of Sup'rs of See Master and Servant, 265.
Ionia County, 168 N. W. 421.
82(3) (Iowa) Only those objections lodged
against assessments for drainage improvement
before board of supervisors may be considered See Carriers, 320.
on appeal.-Christenson v. Board of Sup'rs of
Hamilton County, 168 N. W. 114.
DRAMSHOPS.
See Intoxicating Liquors.
See Municipal Corporations, 733.
DUE PROCESS OF LAW.
See Constitutional Law, 251-313.
II. COMPENSATION.
(C) Measure and Amount.
136 (Iowa) The measure of damages for
the taking of part of a tract of land for a pub-
lic cemetery is the difference between the mar-
ket values of the whole tract or farm before
and after the condemned tract was taken there-
from; the "market value" being the actual
price at which it might ordinarily be sold on
the market to one desiring to purchase.-Wat- with the testimony, where the parties referred
ters v. Platt, 168 N. W. 808.
to the property both as described in the com-
plaint and as described in the amendment.-
Bradford & Co. v. Baxter, 168 N. W. 947.
EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY ACTS.
See Commerce, 27; Master and Servant,
2504, 365, 398, 404; Pleading,
ENLISTMENT.
See Army and Navy, 40.
See Appeal and Error; Justices of the Peace,
139.
See Descent and Distribution, 71; Jury,
19; Trial, 374.
See Deeds, 125; Descent and Distribution;
Dower; Executors and Administrators; Per-
petuities; Wills.
See Adverse Possession, 109; Appeal and
Error, 173, 882, 883; Banks and Bank-
ing, 149; Boundaries, 47; Corpora-
tions, 659; Divorce, 51; Homestead,
31, 145; Guaranty, 21; Insurance,
719; Joint Adventures, 5; Master and
Servant, 73; Mechanics' Liens, 132,
279, 281; Sales, 121.
(A) Creation and Operation in General.
22(2) (Iowa) Fact that mortgage ran to in
dividual and purported consideration passing
from individual to bank holding other mort
gages does not estop bank, in its action against
fire insurer, to show individual held mortgage
in trust as substitute for others held by bank.
State Central Sav. Bank v. St. Paul Fire &
Marine Ins. Co., 168 N. W. 201.
III. EQUITABLE ESTOPPEL.
(A) Nature and Essentials in General.
(C) Principles and Maxims of Equity.
57 (Iowa) Where conveyance to foreign cor-
poration was void because corporation had not
complied with St. 1917, § 1770b, and it convey-58 (Iowa) To warrant plea of estoppel there
ed to another, who gave a mortgage to a bank, must be prejudice to person setting it up.-
which loaned $40,000 to corporation to secure Dolph v. Wortman, 168 N. W. 252.
note of mortgagor, the $5,000 paid by corpora-
tion to its vendors belongs to bank, under max-
im that equity considers done that which ought
to be done; no part of the loan having been re-
paid. Wisconsin Trust Co. v. Munday, 168
N. W. 393.
64 (Mich.) Where adequate remedy at law
has been lost by negligence or lack of diligence,
equity will not interfere to grant relief, since
equity is not solicitous for those who sleep on
their rights.-J. W. Wells Lumber Co. v.
nominee River Boom Co., 168 N. W. 1011.
IV. PLEADING.
(A) Original Bill.
(B) Grounds of Estoppel.
68(2) (Iowa) Notice of loss to fire insurance
company and request for blanks upon which to
make formal proof does not estop claimant, aft-
er discovery that no policy has been issued, from
bringing action against company for damages
for negligence of agent in not sending applica-
tion.-Johnson v. Farmers' Ins. Co., 168 N. W.
264.
Me-68(4) (Iowa) Where defendant made spe-
cial appearance and challenged the jurisdiction
on ground that notice was ineffective, it can-
not afterwards, on plea in abatement, on the
ground that the action was prematurely brought,
effective service subsequently having been made,
claim that the first notice was effective and
288 (Mich.) Comp. Laws 1915, § 12481,
permitting amendment to conform to the proof,
permits an amendment in a bill in aid of exe-
binding.-Hueston v. Preferred Acc. Ins. Co.,
168 N. W. 150.
90(1) (Iowa) A person cannot shield him-
self behind a statute made for his protection
when he consents to the thing being done with-
out the formalities of the statute.-Palo Sav.
Bank v. Cameron, 168 N. W. 769.
92(1) (Mich.) In an action to recover from
an agent the amount of loss an insurance com-
pany paid on a fire policy which the agent did
not cancel as directed, held that, in view of the
relations of the parties, no estoppel against the
company could be predicated on the ground that
it retained the premium on the policy after
directing cancellation.-American Ins. Co. of
Newark, N. J., v. Martinek, 168 N. W. 982.
92(2) (S.D.) Plaintiffs could not urge, in
an action to surrender and cancel a promissory
note and mortgage given as commissions to a
broker on an exchange of land, that the com-
pensation received by defendant was so great
unconscionable; plaintiffs having reaped the
benefit of the transaction.-Stanton v. Mer-
chants' Loan & Trust Co., 168 N. W. 746.
See Criminal Law, 304-564; Witnesses.
For evidence as to particular facts or issues or
in particular actions or proceedings, see also
the various specific topics.
For review of rulings relating to evidence, see
Appeal and Error.
Reception at trial, see Criminal Law,
678; Trial, 46-90.
er death is intentional or accidental.-Grosve-
nor v. Fidelity & Casualty Co. of New York,
168 N. W. 596.
Where evidence is offered contrary to pre-
sumption against death by suicide, or presump-
tion is met by conflicting presumptions, it dis-
appears, although the fact upon which it rests
may remain and be considered in reaching a
conclusion.-Id.
IV. RELEVANCY, MATERIALITY,
AND COMPETENCY IN GEN-
121(8) (Minn.) In action to compel contri-
14 (Iowa) It is a matter of common knowl-bution, parol evidence showing a stipulation by
edge that in recent years, as legislation upon
the subject has become more strict, there has
been an increased use of automobiles for trans-
portation and distribution of intoxicating liq-
uors.-State v. Raph, 168 N. W. 259.
defendant signing a joint note at request of
principal debtor, that he signed only as sure-
ty to those signing prior to himself was not
objectionable as hearsay, being res gestæ.-
Pope v. Hoefs, 168 N. W. 584.
126(1) (Iowa) Where deceased was killed by
discharge of a rifle, his explanation at the time
of the accident held admissible in an action on
an insurance policy.-Ellis v. Interstate Busi-
ness Men's Acc. Ass'n, 168 N. W. 212.
22(1) (N.D.) Judicial notice will be taken
that in almost all fraternal associations the
amount of the insurance or benefit is limited to
a comparatively small amount, while in old-line
companies there is practically no limit to the
policy which has usually a cash surrender and
(C) Similar Facts and Transactions.
loan value.-Brown v. Steckler, 168 N. W. 670.
129(6) (Iowa) In action to recover price
The court will judicially notice that fraternal
associations serve a peculiar purpose in afford- paid for corporate stock, purchased at solicita-
tion of defendant whom it is alleged agreed
ing insurance for those of moderate means.—Id.
to repurchase stock from plaintiff, evidence
23(1) (Minn.) The court may take judicial that defendant made similar promises to other
notice of the fact that the address of an owner purchasers was inadmissible on issue whether
of railroad right of way to be crossed by a judi- he made alleged agreement with plaintiff.-Wil-
cial ditch could not well be ascertained by in-kinson v. Dilenbeck, 168 N. W. 115.
quiry at county treasurer's office, as a right of
way would not be entered among the taxable V. BEST AND SECONDARY EVIDENCE.
land.-State v. District Court, Murray County,
168 N. W. 184.
49 (Iowa) District court will take judicial
notice of official character of its clerk, and of
signature of clerk, without reference to fact
whether affidavit is attested by seal.-Ames
Evening Times v. Ames Weekly Tribune, 168 N.
II. PRESUMPTIONS.
67(1) (Iowa) In view of the presumption of
continuity, one asserting a chattel mortgage
had been canceled, and so could not be relied
on, will be granted no relief, where the evidence
is in equipoise.-Bensen & Marxer v. Reger, 168
N. W. 881.
158(28) (Mich.) In an action under the
Death Act, evidence that witness knew dece-
dent sent money to his mother by mail, because
he saw her name, was competent to show that
decedent contributed to her support: the
books of the bank not being a higher grade of
evidence.-Paperno v. Michigan Ry. Engineer-
ing Co., 168 N. W. 503.
159 (Iowa) Where a paper purporting to
be a copy of a confession of testator's wife as
to paternity of contestant was introduced, and
not its recitals, the rule as to proof of loss of
original before introducing a copy was not in-
volved.-In re Osborn's Estate, 168 N. W. 288.
(A) Nature, Form, and Incidents in Gen-
213(2) (Mich.) In action for breach of con-
tract to purchase and carry stock by reason of
its unlawful sale, plaintiff's admission that he
might have repurchased the stock after knowl-
edge of its sale for a difference of $600 was
admissible, being more than an effort to com-
promise, and an admission of a material fact.-
Wallace v. H. W. Noble & Co., 168 N. W. 984.
(D) By Agents or Other Representatives.
7 (N.D.) Presumption that letter claimed
to be sent by one to another has been received
does not arise until it is shown that it was
properly addressed and stamped and deposited
in some post office where mail may be legally
deposited for collection, such as mail boxes on
rural routes.-Kvale v. Keane, 168 N. W. 74.
78 (Iowa) One who sues upon a policy of
life insurance, the existence and issuance of
which are denied, has the burden to show at
least prima facie that the policy was issued,
although the insurer's books show an unex-
plained erasure in the column for entry of the
word "approved" and "rejected," since the pre-241(1) (S.D.) If a third person acted for
sumption arising from the destruction of evi-
dence that it was unfavorable can be used in
corroboration but is insufficient alone to sup-
port recovery.-Straight v. American Life Ins.
Co., 168 N. W. 84.
82 (Iowa) In forcible entry and detainer,
where defendant made a plea in bar and a plea
in abatement, and the petition was dismissed,
the judgment entry failing to indicate whether
the judgment was in bar or abatement, such
omission raised a presumption in favor of the
bar. Snyder v. Fahey, 168 N. W. 117.
defendant in a transaction involving the sale
and setting up of farm machinery, his state-
ments were binding on defendant.-Barnard-
Giles-Moses Co. v. Christy, 168 N. W. 737.
(E) Proof and Effect.
265(3) (Mich.) Where railroad built side
track for factory which agreed to pay construc-
tion cost, and the railroad sued for the full
cost, including price of material which it
agreed to furnish, and the factory admitted that
the cost of building was $300, but the court
89 (Neb.) Presumption against death by su- found from the evidence that the actual cost
icide is prima facie only, and rebuttable, and was less than $200, the railroad could not re-
prevails when the cause of death is unknown, cover the amount admitted due.-Waters
but not in presence of facts bearing upon wheth-Lakewood Utilities Co., 168 N. W. 1021.
1847," and others "E. S. Co. 1935," held not
varied by parol evidence that seller represent-
ed them all to be Rogers Bros. 1847 brand of
silverware, and that those designated E. S.
Co. (seller's initials) were simply expressly
made for it.-Elliott Supply Co. v. Ross, 168
W. 58.
IX. HEARSAY.
317(5) (Minn.) On issue whether resident
of a school district was a freeholder, evidence
that such resident, present in court, but who
did not sign a petition for consolidation of dis-
tricts, had said that he had no interest in a
certain tract, was hearsay and inadmissible.-N.
In re Consolidation of School Dists. in Blue
Earth County, 168 N. W. 552.
X. DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE.
(A) Public or Official Acts, Proceedings.
Records, and Certificates.
445(1) (N.D.) In view of Comp. Laws
1913, §§ 5889, 5938, a written contract cannot
be altered by a subsequent parol agreement,
unless such agreement is executed.-Quinlivan
v. Dennstedt Land Co., 168 N. W. 51.
The contracting parties may enter into a
new parol agreement creating obligations sep-
arate from, and at variance with, the old
agreement, and such new agreement will be
binding unless one required by statute to be in
writing.-Id.
332(1) (Wis.) In action for breach of con-
tract by which plaintiff agreed to cease prosecu-
tion of Utah action, and defendants agreed to
turn over certain documents, the record in the
Utah case, showing a final judgment for plain-
tiff, should have been admitted in evidence.-445(9) (Iowa) In action on notes, parol evi-
Elmergreen v. Kern, 168 N. W. 407.
dence of holder company's agreement to dismiss
prior pending suit and to forbear bringing
another for some time was not incompetent as
tending to vary terms of written instrument,
but tended to prove a subsequent independent
Mammoth
agreement.-Goodman Mfg. Co. v.
Vein Coal Co., 168 N. W. 912.
(C) Private Writings and Publications.
354(13) (Minn.) Entries in books of ac-
count may be admissible as original entries
within Gen. St. 1913, § 8437, though transcrib-
ed from temporary memoranda, which are not
produced or preserved, if the entries are sub-
stantially contemporaneous with the transac-
tion. Keller Electric Co. v. Burg, 168 N. W.
98.
355(2) (Iowa) In a suit for damages to a
shipment of eggs, an unsworn and unsigned
statement of account sent by the consignee to
the shipper reciting that the shipment was dam-
aged on arrival held inadmissible.-Yarcho V.
Chicago, R. I. & P. Ry. Co., 168 N. W. 336.
(D) Production, Authentication, and Ef-
(D) Construction or Application of Lan-
gunge of Written Instrument.
457 (Mich.) Where bill of lading provides
for transportation of goods "with reasonable
dispatch," parol evidence of a conversation
wherein carrier assured shipper before sign-
ing of bill of lading that goods, would reach
destination before certain time is admissible
as bearing on carrier's understanding of what
was a reasonable time, and is not objection-
able as varying terms of bill of lading.-Har-
mon v. Michigan United Traction Co., 168 N.
W. 521.
378(2) (N.D.) An answer to a letter claim-
ed to have been sent is not admissible unless
original letter is shown to have been properly 461(1) (Iowa) On the question whether sale
was by the acre or in gross, the deed not indi-
addressed with sufficient postage and deposited
in some place whence mail was legally collect-cating, the original contract is admissible.—
ed, as without such proof there is not founda- Gardner v. Kiburz, 168 N. W. 814.
tion for its admission.-Kvale v. Keane, 168
N. W. 74.
XI. PAROL OR EXTRINSIC EVI-
DENCE AFFECTING WRITINGS.
(A) Contradicting, Varying, or Adding to
Terms of Written Instrument.
419(13) (Minn.) Under a contract to con-
vey land reciting that part of the consideration
should be the conveyance of a quarter section
of land, evidence of what the parties agreed on
as the value of the land to be conveyed was
proper, as it did not contradict the written con-
tract, but supplemented it.-Nelson v. McElroy,
168 N. W. 179.
XII. OPINION EVIDENCE.
(A) Conclusions and Opinions of Witness-
es in General.
471(6) (Iowa) Question whether in negotia-
tions there was any talk between the parties to
the effect that they put trading values rather
than actual values on the property, caled for
mere conclusions of witness.-Gardner v. Ki-
burz, 168 N. W. 814.
471(13) (N.D.) A layman is competent to
testify as to the size of an abscess which can
be observed with a naked eye.-Beardsley v.
Ewing, 168 N. W. 791.
A contract to convey land reciting that part471(19) (Iowa) In action for price of light-
of the consideration should be the conveyance
of a quarter section of land, so far as it related
to the amount of the consideration, was not
within the statute of frauds.-Id.
423(8) (Minn.) Stipulation by one signing
joint note at request of principal debtor that he
signed only as surety to those signing prior to
himself might be shown by parol evidence.
Pope v. Hoefs, 168 N. W. 584.
(B) Invalidating Written Instrument.
434(13) (N.D.) In a suit to recover under
an insurance policy where defendant interposed
a written agreement fixing the loss at a less
sum than sued for, evidence showing that the
written agreement was fraudulent was not inad-
missible as contradicting it; it not represent-
ing the actual contract made between the par-
ties.-Mathias v. State Farmers' Mut. Hail Ins.
Co., 168 N. W. 664.
(C) Separate or Subsequent Oral Agree-
ment.
442(6) (S.D.) A written order for table
ing plant sold, testimony of manager of defend-
ant's store that plant never gave good satisfac-
tion, though somewhat in nature of conclusion,
was a fact which the witness could state from
his observation. Hawkeye Mfg. Co. v. Farmers'
Mercantile Co., 168 N. W. 868.
471(29) (Iowa) Questions whether values
of properties stated in a contract were actual
or trading values, and whether any actual val-
ues were fixed on the lands, called for mere con-
clusions of the witness.-Gardner v. Kiburz, 168
N. W. 814.
4982 (Minn.) The admission of opinion
evidence, as to whether a furnace would prop-
erly heat a building, was within the discretion
of the trial court.-Madsen v. Latzke, 168 N.
W. 11.
501 (3) (Neb.) A nonexpert witness cannot
give her opinion as to the mental capacity of
testatrix, unless such opinion is based solely on
facts relating to the conduct and action of the
testatrix as detailed in the evidence of the wit-
ness.-In re Gunderman's Estate, 168 N. W.
(B) Subjects of Expert Testimony.
506 (Iowa) Expert witness ought not to
be permitted to state as ultimate fact that
about which there is controversy where fact
is deducible only as conclusion from other
facts shown.-Brier v. Chicago, R. I. & P.
Ry. Co., 168 N. W. 539.
8(3) (Mich.) An allegation of fraud is suf-
ficient where facts alleged show defendant was
active in an execution of the fraudulent trans-
action, whereby plaintiff was induced to trade
real estate, and received his share of the pro-
ceeds.-Watson v. Wagner, 168 N. W. 428.
8(4) (Iowa) That one party to an exchange
519 (Minn.) Expert testimony, on founda- of land parted with $14,800 worth of property
tion laid, on rebuttal as to automobile wheel without receiving anything of value in return
tracks on pavement at place of collision the is a strong circumstance tending to show fraud.
morning after and his opinion of its indicated-Lister v. La Plant, 168 N. W. 138.
movements, was admissible.-Carson v. Tur-
rish, 168 N. W. 349.
In an action to rescind exchange of farms,
evidence held sufficient to show defendants mis-
528(1) (Iowa) In action for injuries to rail- represented value of their farm.-Id.
road's servant, where evidence disclosed how 8(4) (Iowa) Evidence held not to warrant
plaintiff was injured, medical witnesses were
a finding that exchange of land was induced by
properly permitted to testify whether such in- defendant through deception; plaintiff having
juries could cause pain, as plaintiff testified. inspected the land, and not having relied on de-
Brier v. Chicago, R. I. & P. Ry. Co., 168 N. fendant's statements.-Anderson v. Burns, 168
N. W. 146.
(C) Competency of Experts.
543(4) (N.D.) An experienced lumberman
in charge of a line yard, stating that he was
familiar with the 1915 invoice price for western
lumber, was qualified to testify on the value of
lumber in 1915 and 1916.-Magnuson v. Stiehm,
168 N. W. 613.
XIV. WEIGHT AND SUFFICIENCY.
8(5) (Mich.) Where defendant, a party to a
contract for an exchange of properties, knew
that legal title to property he agreed to convey
was in name of another, and was owned by a
corporation in which defendant was a minority
stockholder, measure of other party's damage
was amount lost through defendant's breach of
his contract, to be ascertained as of date of
breach.-Hamburger v. Berman, 168 N. W. 925.
EXECUTION.
589 (Iowa) That witnesses are interested
and parties to suit is a matter to be consider-See Appeal and Error, 1043; Equity,
ed as bearing upon their credibility.-Dolph v.
Wortman, 168 N. W. 252.
591 (S.D.) A party who introduces a depo-
sition for the purpose of showing his cross-
examination of the deponent is not bound by
the statements therein contained.-Barker v.
Coats, 168 N. W. 797.
596 (1) (Iowa) On the trial of an issue of fact
the question is whether plaintiff has sustained
his contention by sufficient evidence that rea-
sonable minds are able to say with reasonable
certainty, that the fact asserted is as contend-
ed.-Carpenter v. Security Fire Ins. Co., 168
N. W. 231.
596 (1) (Neb.) Burden of proving a cause of
action or defense is not sustained by evidence
from which jury can arrive at its conclusion
only by mere guess or conjecture.-Grosvenor
v. Fidelity & Casualty Co. of New York, 168
EXCEPTIONS, BILL OF.
See Criminal Law, 1090.
EXCHANGE OF PROPERTY.
See Appeal and Error, 216; Evidence,
471; Vendor and Purchaser, 3.
288; Fraudulent Conveyances, 43, 300;
Judgment, 787; Sheriffs and Constables,
125.
EXECUTORS AND ADMINISTRATORS.
See Descent and Distribution; Dower, 27;
Infants, 78; Judgment, 688; Master
and Servant, 354, 386, 400; Wills.
II. APPOINTMENT. QUALIFICATION,
AND TENURE.
20(3) (Mich.) The Russian consul may, un-
der the law of nations and doctrine of comity
because of his duty to conserve the estate and
as representative of the next of kin, petition
for the appointment of an administrator for
deceased Russian subject,
the estate of a
where the next of kin are also Russian sub-
jects.-Paperno v. Michigan Ry. Engineering
Co., 168 N. W. 503.
24 (Mich.) The "most favored nation"
clause in the Russian-American Treaty of
1832 (article 8), considered in connection with
the treaty with the Argentine Confederation
(10 Stat. 1005, art. 9), does not confer on
Russian consuls the power to administer es-
tates of Russian subjects.-Paperno v. Michi-
gan Ry. Engineering Co., 168 N. W. 503.
29(2) (Mich.) In an administrator's action
(Mich.) A contract whereby plaintiff was for the wrongful death of his decedent, where-
to convey an equity in property in consideration in the decree of the probate court appointing
of defendant's conveyance of an equity in other him is attacked collaterally on the ground of
property, each to assume a mortgage, to furnish nonresidence, the court may not retry the
an abstract of title, and to deliver possession, question of residence, the probate court hav-
was a contract for an exchange of properties.- ing acquired jurisdiction.-Paperno v. Michi-
Hamburger v. Berman, 168 N. W. 925.
gan Ry. Engineering Co., 168 N. W. 503.
III. ASSETS. APPRAISAL, AND IN-
VENTORY.
3(1) (Iowa) Fraud in an exchange of land
will be inferred from inadequacy of considera-
tion only if the disparity between the value of
the lands exchanged is sufficient to shock the
conscience.-Lister v. La Plant, 168 N. W. 138.
Representations as to market value and rent-
al value of land to a person unfamiliar with
land values and its use in the vicinity of such
land were statements of fact, and not mere
opinions. Id.
IV. COLLECTION AND MANAGEMENT
OF ESTATE.
One party to an exchange perpetrates fraud
on the other grantee by permitting his agent to
appear as agent for the other, where agent, hav-
ing confidence of the latter, urges him to make 76 (Wis.) That county court merely rec-
trade.-Id.
ognized that parties had, pursuant to trust
|