years he cannot hold over and serve until policy unless it be attached to that policy. his successor is elected and qualified. If Where a transfer of property was made and his successor does not or cannot qualify the the insurance agent approved of the same office becomes vacant at the end of and gave notice to the home office of the the term and it becomes the duty of company, and about a month subsequently the county commissioners to fill the vacancy. the property was destroyed by fire, the -Gorman v, State.-Filed April 16, 1886. company was held to have approved the -Ind. transfer, Imperial Fire Ins. Co v. DunBY ham.-Filed March 29, 1886.—Pa. TRIAL.--CRIMINAL LAW. —-] --REASONABLE DOUBT.-In trial for a crime the rule, that the jury must be satisfied of the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, does not mean that the prosecution must establish beyond a reasonable doubt every circum TOWN INSURANCE COMPANY.-Loss FIRE CAUSED BY RAILWAY COMPANY.-AsSIGNMENT OF CLAIM.-Where a fire is started by the negligence of a railway company and property, which is insured by a local company destroyed, if the company settle the loss for less than the claim and pay it, it may take an assignment of the claim and collect the whole claim of the railway com- stance or link in the chain of evidence ofpany, without regard to the amount it paid in adjusting and settling with the assured.H. F. Mut. Ins. Co. v. C. M. & St. P. Ry. Co.-Filed April 6, 1886.-Wis. TOWNSHIP SUPERVISORS.-POWER TO EM- Filed April 9, 1886.—Colo. PLOY ATTORNEY TO PROSECUTE OR DEFEND AN ACTION IN BEHALF OF THE TOWN.-The supervisor of an unincorporated town has power to employ counsel to prosecute or defend an action on behalf of the town. Where such counsel has been employed and the services performed with the acquiesence of the town, it will be held to have ratified the act of the supervisor in the employment of the attorney.-Town of Bruce v. Dickey, Ex'x.-Filed March 27, 1886.—Ill. fered. Charging the jury that they must be satisfied that each link in the chain of evidence has been established beyond a reas onable doubt is error.-Clair v. People. TRIAL.-WAIVER OF ARGUMENT BY COUNSEL.-Where a case has been tried to the court and at the close of the testimony the plaintiff's counsel asks the opposing counsel, in the presence of the court, if the case shall be submitted without argument, to which the defendant's counsel makes no re TRESPASS.-ACTION BY ONE IN POSSESSION-MEASURE OF DAMAGES.-In an action hy one in possession of lands, not the owner, against highway commissioners for trespass, in destroying a hedge fence, it was held that such action would lie and that damages of $204 for the destruction of 102 rods of hedge fence was not excessive.—ply, and it is submitted without argument, Shoup v. Shields.-Filed March 27, 1886.- the defendant will be held to have waived his right to argue the case, by his silence.— Ill. TRANSFER OF INSURANCE POLICY.-AP- Piatt v. Head.—Filed May 7, 1886.—Kans. PLICATION NO PART OF POLICY UNLESS AT TACHED.-Under the act of May 11, 1881, TRUST DEED.-VOLUNTARY SETTLEMENT the statements made in an application for FREE FROM FRAUD, MISTAKE OR UNDUE INinsurance cannot be made a part of the FLUENCE.-Where a wife owning a separate If the owner conveys the land after the road is closed, the right to damages does not vest in the grantee unless there be an evpress covenant to that effect.-King v. St. Patrick's Cathedral.-Flle April 13, 1886.-Ind. estate, executed a deed of trust, settling her owner. TRUST FUNDS.-CERTIFICATE OF DEPOSIT A VENDOR AND VENDEE.--CONVEYANCE PENDENte lite---Notice.—Purchasers BOUND BY JUDGMENT.—One who purchases real estate pendente lite is chargeable with express notice of the suit and its character, FUNDS.—A national bank is not prohibited and he is bound by the judgment from issuing time certificates of deposit. rendered in the case the same as though he trustee who, in good faith, invests trust funds had been a party to the suit. To a deed in certificates of deposit of a bank in good which was unrecorded it is necessary to. standing, is not liable for the loss in case the show that a subsequent grantee had notice bank fails and the money so invested is of the unrecorded deed.—Smith v. Hodson. lost.-Hunt, Trustee v. Cestui qu Trust.——Filed March 18, 1886.—Me. Filed May 7, 1886.-Mass. VENDOR AND VENDEE. CONVEYANCE INCUMBRANCE WHICH IS UNDUE INFLUENCE. FRAUD OR WRONG SUBJECT TO AN MUST ENTER IN TO CONSTITUTE UNDЛE IN- TAINTED WITH USURY.-Where a grantee FLUENCE. The exercise of honest argument takes land subject to a mortgage which is and persuasion will not constitute undue in- usurious, he cannot avail himself of the defluence, such as to avoid a deed or will un- fense of usury as against a foreclosure of the less the element of fraud or wrong enter into mortgage. Where the whole transaction the matter. Where a deed is made for a shows that he understood fully the amount valuable consideration, although inadequate, of the lien, including the usurious interest, it is sufficient to support the deed in the will be treated as part of the consideration. absence of fraud.—Sturtevant v. Sturtevant. Essley v. Sloan.-Filed March 27, 1889-Ill. -Filed March 27, 1886.—Ill. VENDOR AND VENDEE. -REFORMATION VENDOR AND VENDEE. AN OVERSTATE- OF DEED. -AGREEMENT---BREACH OF CONMENT OF THE QUANTITY.-ABATEMENT OF TRACT.-Where land was conveyed to a -Where a vendor sells railway company, a part consideration for land, at a fixed price per acre, and fraudu- which was that a depot should be built on lently overstates the quantity of land, and the land, in an action on the parol agreethe deed, after specifying the number of ment for damages for not building the depot, acres, contains the words "more or less" the the introduction of testimony in support of vendee is entitled to an abatement of the the agreement cannot be denied on the purchase price to correspond with actnal ground that it is tending to a reformation of quantity of land conveyed.-Tyler v. Anderson. Filed April 15. 1886.—Ind. THE FIXED PRICE. VENDOR AND Vendee.—DAMAGES FOR CLOSING A HIGHWAY.-DAMAGE DOES NOT RUN WITH THE LAND.-Damages for the closing of a highway accrue at the time it is closed and it is a personal right of the] the deed. The measure of damages in such case is the actual damage or injury sustamed in consequence of the failure of the Company to perform their agreement.West Chester & P. Ry. Co. v. Broomall.Filed March 1, 1886.-Pa. WAIVER OF GUARANTY- -CONDITIONAL SALE.—LEASE.—Where party leased some necessary to describe the highway, by metes timber land, with the privilege of cutting and bounds in the writ.-Smith v. Bd. of and removing the timber, and a promissory Supervisors.-Filed May 15, 1896.-Wis. note for a given sum was made by the lessee and delivered to the lessor, for the payment of which the lessor was to hold the lumber cut on the premises, and after the maturity of the note the lessor granted the lessee the privilege of going on and cutting and removing lumber, the lessee becoming insolvent made an assignment, and it is held that the lumber at that time cut and being removed from the land belonged to the assignee, the lessor having waived his lien upon the same.- Wilkie v. Day.-Filed January 18, 1886.-Mass. WATER-COURSES. RIPARIAN RIGHTS.-DIVERSION OF STREAM BY A PRIYATE CORPORATION.-A private corporation has not more right to divert a stream of water from its course and deprive the riparian owner of his rights than an individual or natural person has, and neither can do so without making proper compensation to the owner. -Lux v. Haggin.-Filed April 26, 1886.— Cal. WIFE'S SEPARATE ESTATE. HUSBAND DOES NOT BECOME HIS WIFE'S CREDITOR BY PAYING TAXES ON HER PROPERTY.-WIFE'S WAIVER. INSURANCE.-OVER-INSURVNCE EARNINGS.-A husband who pays the taxes AND FALSE CLAIM.-If the insured commits on the separate property of his wife cannot a breach of the conditions of the policy, claim that he is her creditor for the amount and the company knowing of such breach paid. Money earned by and received by a collects the premiums, it waives the breach. wife for keeping boarders belong to the husOver-insurance will not vitiate the policy, band and not the wife.-Hamill v. Henry. but in case of loss, an over-estimate of the Filed April 23, 1886.—Iowa. loss will. False statements in the application for insurance, written by the company's agent without the knowledge of the assured, will not vitiate the policy.---Stone v. Hawkeye Ins. Co.-Filed April 23, 1886.-Iowa. WILL.--AFTER-ACQUIRED PROPERTY. -— REVOCATION OF WILL.-Where a testator intended by his will to devise after-acquired property, and a trnst deed in force at the time of making the will is revoked by him WARRANT ISSUED ON INSUFFICIENT AFFI- before his death, the title reverting to testaDAVIT. —. LIABILITY OF PLAINTIFF.-Where tor it is the same in effect as after-acquired a warrant is issued in a civil action on in- property.-Morey v. Sohier.-Filed March sufficient affidavit, for the arrest of the de- 12, 1886.-N. H. fendant, the plaintiff is liable in an action of trespass, but the party who serves the warrant assumes no liability, if he has no knowledge of the fact of the insufficiency of the affidavit.-Murdock v. Killips.-Filed April 6, 1886.-Wis. WAYS.-POWER OF SUPERVISORS.-COMPELLING THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS TO AP POINT APPRAISERS AND ASSESS DAMAGES. WILLS. ANTE-NUPTIAL AGREEMENT-EFFECT UPON A WILL.-Where a man and woman enter into an agreement in view of their approaching marriage, whereby the woman is to retain the same control of her property as if she remained unmarried, and she makes a will in which she bequeathes all her property to her children, the agreement is valid as to all property she owned at the time it was executed.-Osgood v. Bliss.—Filed April 1, 1886.—Mass. The board of supervisors have power to order repairs on a highway, although it is the ordinary duty of the overseer to do it. In a writ to compel the board to appoint the appraisers, to assess and award damages caused by repairs on a highway it is not TATE AMONG THE HEIRS.-PROBATE OF THE WILL.-AMICABLE SETTLEMENT OF AN ES WILL AFTER SUCH SETTLEMENT.—Where the bond of $1,000, making his bequest $5,000 heirs of a decedent agree upon a settlement in all. The bequest being to Washington of and distribution of the estate, indepen- College and the bond against the Virginia dent of the will of the decedent, the settle- Military Institute, both of which are located ment is binding and final, and one of the in the same town and substantially different heirs, subsequently becoming dissatisfied departments of the same school, it was held with the settlement, cannot have the will that the legacy was in favor of Washington probated when prior to the settlement the College only.-Washington & Lee Universexistence of the will was known to him.-ity's appeal.-Filed Feb. 1, 1886.-Pa. Foote v. Foote.-Filed April 29, 1886.— Mich. CONTRACT-TO WILL.-POWER OF APPOINTMENT AND WITNESS.-DECEASE OF ONE PARTY TO A ABUSE OF THE POWER.-Where a testator WHAT SURVIVING PARTY bequeaths to his widow a life-estate in his MAY TESTIFY.—Where one of the parties to property, with power to dispose of the rea contract dies the presumptions are in mainder to his heirs, any exercise of favor of sustaining the contract. The sur- that power, whereby she would procure to viving party cannot testify to any fact, as be- herself any pecuniary benefit not intended tween himself and the deceased party, to in the will, is an abuse of the power conwhich the deceased might testify if living.ferred upon her.-Shank v. Dewitt.-Filed Seligman v. Estate of Ten Eyck.-Filed April 21, 1886.-Ohio. April 8, 1886.—Mich. WILL. REVOCATION OF. REMARRIAGE WILL. INTENTION OF TESTATOR AS CON- OF TESTATOR AFTER MAKING WILL.-INTROLLING EQUITABLE CONVERSION.-The in- CREASE OF THE ESTATE. The legislature tention of the testator often determines having established certain modes by which a whether property shall be treated as personal or realty. A bequest in money being subsequently invested in realty for the purpose of security shall still be treated as personal property in the settlement of the estate.- Vandewalker V. Rollins.-Filed March 12, 1886.-N. H. will may be revoked, the court cannot ignore the statutory provisions and declare the will revoked by implied intentions of the testa tor. The death of legatees, marriage of the testator without subsequent issue, and a large increase in the value of the estate after execution of the will, do not, necessarily, work a revocation.-Hoit v. Hoit.-Filed March 12, 1886.-N. H. WILLS. POWER OF EXECUTOR TO CONVEY REAL ESTATE, LEGAL TITLE IN EXECUTOR.- CHARITIES.-FORCE OF BY-LAWS FOR Where an executor is authorized by the THEIR REGULATION.-PUBLIC POLICY.—The terms of a will to make such disposition of charter of a charitable institution provided the property as is necessary to carry out the for its management as might be prescribed intention of the testator, and he, in good by-law. Among the rules or by-laws, it faith, and for a fair consideration, conveys was provided that any one entering to rereal estate, such conveyance is valid and a ceive the benefits of the institution should court of equity will not cancel the deed. transfer to it all the property they had. An Hanson v. Brewer.-Filed April 7, 1886.- applicant for admission falsely represented Minn. that he had no property and, being admitted WILL. INTENTION OF TESAATOR CON- and cared for until his death, it was found TROLS IN CONSTRUCTION.—A testator hold- that he was possessed of $1,200 worth of ing a bond against the Virginia Military In- property. Held that the institution was enstitute bequeathed $4,000 to Washington titled to the property.--Aged People's Home v College and directed the cancellation of the Hammerbacker.-Filed March 10, 1886--Md Killy v. Mayor of Baltimore. Filed Oct., 1885.—Md. (The establishment of the grade of streets may be done either before or after condem. nation proceedings or before work of paving is begun.) McGarrahan v. Lavers. (In an action for false imprisonment, it appeared that the defendant had directed an officer to take plaintiff into custody and the officer did so. Held that he was responsible for the arrest as it was directed and authorized by him.) In Re Lindsley. Filed Jan. 7, 1886.-N. J. (The court may order an examination of an alleged lunatic, but where a preponderance of evidence is in favor of the finding of lunacy, and two experts testify in opposition to the finding, a new commission should be appointed and the alleged lunatic examined in the presence of the jury.) Schuyler v. Schuyler. Filed Jan. 14, 1886.--N. J. (A man who seduces a woman and to avoid prosecution marries her and immediately abandons her, may be compelled to pay her a separate maintenance.) In Re Spring Street, Reading. Filed April 12, 1886.-Pa. (Where proceedings for the opening of a street have been commenced in the court of quarter sessions instead of common pleas, and prosecuted to final judgment without objection, the proceedings will be sustained.) Garrett v. Jones. Filed April 9, 1886.—Md. (No action will lie for obstruction light or view by the erection of adjoining houses in a city. It is damnum abesque injuria.) Schulting Ex'x. v. Schulting. Filed April 17. 1886.—N. J. to sell to trustees includes a power to mortgage, when the object of the trust can be accomplished by mortgage. The power to sell will be so construed as authorizing a mortgage when it is necessary for the preservation of the estate, but not merely for improvement of the estate.) Uhl v. Beatly. Filed Dec. 11, 1885.—N. J. (A debtor may prefer one or more of his creditors and his undertaking to do so is not in conflict with the statute of frauds.) State v. Lockwood. (The transposition of the letters "e" and "a" in the word "steal', in an indictment so as to make the word “stael" does not invalidate the indictment. Where a witness is testifying a second time in the same case, it is not an error to allow him to state why his testimony on different trials differs.) Bemis v. Central Vt. Ry. Co. (Expert testimony is not admissible on a question that is familiar to men in the ordinary walks of life.) Sawyer v. Hebard's Estate. (A parent or child cannot recover for support furnished each other unless it is shown that there was an express contract between them.) Merrill, Admr. v. North Yarmouth. Filed April 7. 1886.—Me. (In an action against a town for the death of a person by reason of bad condition of highway, the plaintiff must show that deceased exercised due care.) City of Olney v. Wharf. (Individuals suffering damage from the laying of a railway track on a street or highway, cannot sustain an action for dam. (The general rule is that a grant of power ages against the city for the same.) |