capital stock of a mining corpora- tion, and its contract for such pur- chase is void. Railroad Co. v. Burke.
136 2. An Ohio railway has no power to buy the capital stock of a mining corporation, and a contract therefor is void. Ib.
3. Several roads coming to- gether at a certain city from different directions and connected only by three or four miles of track built to secure a union depot, are not so dis- connected but that they may con- solidate as a connected and continu- ous line under sec. 3380, R. S. Burke v. Railroad Co. 525 4. The lines of two or more railway companies, which are not, "in their general features parallel and competing," may become consoli- dated into one corporation under secs. 3380 to 3384, R. S. Ib.
5. Railway companies seek- ing consolidation, under the consoli- dation act, secs. 3379 to 3388, R. S., may agree upon the number and amount of shares of the proposed consolidation company. Ib.
6. Section 3313, R. S., makes the purchase of bonds of a railroad company by a director, at less than par, null and void. Shoemaker's Ex'rs v. Railroad Co.
7. Where a railroad compa- ny isues so-called preferred stock, and a mortgage to secure it, by the terms of which the trustee for the stockholders under the mortgage is given power in case of default in the payment of eight per cent. divi- dends, guaranteed on the stock, to take possession of the road, and after paying all lawful prior charges and running expenses, to pay up de- faults, etc. Held, that the lawful prior charges were those arising on prior mortgages and liens by law prior to them. Miller v. Ratter- 555
8. The terms and conditions of the certificate and mortgage made the obligation of the company to pay the so-called dividends prior to the unsecured debts or subsequent mort- gage debts. Ib.
9. That such priority was in- consistent with the liabilities of stockholders under the constitution and laws of this state, and that the so-called preferred stockholders were in fact owners of a perpetual annuity secured by mortgage.
10. That it was within the power of such company to renew old mortgage debts by issuing such an- nuities secured by mortgage.
II. Such annuities are tax- able in the hands of their owners, and should be returned by them for taxation under secs. 2736 and 2737.
12. Railway companies have general power to issue bonds se- cured by mortgage, and where such bonds are issued in excess of the amount allowed by law, there can be no recovery on the bonds, against the individual stockholders and directors who caused the issue. Raymond v. Railroad Co.
416 13. A holder of such bonds will not be presumed to have notice of the clause in the mortgage limit- ing the effect of the contract con- tained in the bond, by reason of a general reference to the "terms and conditions" of the mortgage, con- tained in the bonds.
Reformatory Institutions-Sentence.
REFORMATION-Continued.
ownes the adjoining property, he cannot be permitted to reform the conveyance so as to limit it to the smaller quantity. Ib. REFORMATORY INSTITUTIONS 1. The directors of the House of Refuge and Correction of Cleve- land, under sec. 2039 R. S., have au- thority to employ the necessary sub- ordinate officers, etc., and to fix their compensation. State v. Cleveland. 571
2. The city council has control over the question of such compensation, and it is not necessary that council first pass an ordinance for the payment of such employees before the city auditor can be re- quired to issue warrants for their payment. Ib.
3. Section 1693, R. S., that no appropriation of money shali be made except by ordinance, does not apply, for this is not an original ap- propriation but payment of a debt, out of the fund applicable thereto. Ib.
RELIGIOUS SOCIETY-
1. Property was held in trust for a certain sect and at a general conference, the highest authority in the sect an amended constitution and revised confession of faith were adopted and a small part of the gen- eral conference seceded, and claim the property; Held, that the civil courts have jurisdiction only in case of a perversion of trust. Griggs v. Middaugh. 643
On matters of form and discipline the decision of the su- preme authority of the church is binding on the courts. Ib.
3. It is only in cases of de- parture in essential matters of faith or organic law that the courts can look to see if the body has trans- cended its powers, and the departure must be obvious. Ib.
4. Where such changes do not conflict with any formal doctrinal matter, nor with the substance of the faith, and are adopted in the method provided for by the constitution of the church, the schismatics cannot obtain aid from the courts. RES JUDICATA-
A fine of $25 for keeping a place where liquor is sold is not un- reasonable under sec. 1862, Rev. Stat., providing that $10 a day is not unreasonable for a continuous thing, for the act is not continuous in its
nature. McCrea V. Washington.
1. Equitable set-off against the receiver of a national bank, is not forbidden by sec. 5242, R. S. of the U. S. Armstrong v. Warner. 434
2. A stockholder's indebted- ness against a bank cannot be set off against the claims of a pledgee of stock of the former, who received it in pledge to secure the payment of a loan made on the faith of such pledge, without knowledge of the claims of the bank, or that it was in- solvent. McConville v. Means. 452 SEWERS-
I. The right to alter a con- "tract to build a sewer or change the work is limited by secs. 2224 and 442 2225, R. S. Gano v. Eshelby.
2. Section 2224, allowed ad- ditions not swelling the cost be- yond the original estimate, but the amendment in 78 O. L., 228, con- fines them to the cost of the original Ib. contract.
3. If a change made plainly increases the cost of the entire work beyond what the work under the original contract would have cost, then such change is beyond the power of the board to make; and is void.
4. The fact that the work has been done does not estop the city from defending against a claim made under such void contract, for the ex- cess over and above the cost of the original contract, for the contractor, knew of the want of power.
5. If a lot is provided with lo- cal drainage at a point beyond the average depth of lots it cannot for the purpose of assessment be con- sidered as already provided with Cincinnati V. Kassel- drainage.
6. Lots are not to be deemed already provided with drainage be- cause they reach back to a perma- nent water course, which will take their surface water even if the sewer empties into it. For the law will not Ib. allow fouling a water course.
7. In levying assessments for the construction of sewers, sec. 2269 improve- R. S., which relates to ments generally, applies, and there- fore lots are to be fixed as of the on the im- average depth of lots
1. Specific performance of a contract of sale of real estate will not be decreed in a case where there is a grave doubt about the validity of the title of the vendor, and such doubt may arise upon a question of law or the construction of a will. Breuer v. Hayes. 391 2. A person who has con- tracted to purchase property will not be compelled to perform, where a suit affecting his grantor's right is pending, although the court believes the suit to be groundless, and the claimant to be estopped. Hopple v. Overbeck. 296
3. The proposed purchaser I will not be burdened by having to defend even an unjust claim. Ib.
4. Equity will decree specific performance of a contract for the lease of real estate where the only defense is, that the quantity of land described in the lease tendered is slightly less than that contracted for, if the court is satisfied that defendant will thus receive substantially that which he agreed to lease. Bowler v. Brush El. L. Co. 582
5. If the deficiency in such case is sufficient to affect the value of the property, the court may de- cree specific performance with com- pensation to defendant for the differ- Ib. ence in value.
6. In a contract providing for the exchange of a tract of land, for a farm and farm outfit title and pos- session to be delivered May 1st, held that time of performance was suf- ficiently material to make it equi- table to enforce a purchase on a title to the tract not perfected by vendor until nine months after objection by vendee and the time fixed for per- formance. Breuer v. Hayes. 583
7. Executors made a void lease under a naked power of sale and conveyed the reversion subject to the lease: Held, that the claim that the two acts constitute a iawful ex- ecution of the power, is, at least, so doubtful that in absence of cestuis que trust equity ought not to force upon a purchaser, a title dependent for its validity upon the deed of the reversion. Ib.
When a notice to repair a side- upon an abutting
T. Criminal, or penal stat-
Street Railroads-Sureties.
utes must be strictly construed, and cannot be extended by implication to cases not falling within ternis. State v. Fennessy.
2. Section 3398, R. S., should be fairly construed so as to effect the purpose for which it was enacted. Loan and Trust Co. v. Railroad Co. 3. The statute which prohibits 481 the keeping open of saloons for busi- ness, and the sale of intoxicating liquors, on Sunday, is a criminal law of the state. State v. Police Board. 4. Section 7263, R. S., does 256 not in terms, or by implication, re- strict the right to have a change of venue to defendant in a criminal case, but it bestows the same right upon both state and defendant. State v. Myers.
5. That section thus strued is not in conflict with sec. 10, art. 1, of the constitution. STREET RAILROADS-
I. It cannot be said that the right of a street railway to occupy a street for travel is a superior right to that of using it for telephone poles. Telegraph Assn. v. Inclined Plane Ry. Co.
713 A telephone grant of the right to use a street is as company's well founded as that of a street rail- way. Ib. 3. The consent of abutting lot-owners upon a street occupied by a street railroad is not required, and is not a condition precedent to the right of the council to grant a re- newal of the franchise of such com- pany, under secs. 2501 and 2502, R. S. Petton v. Railroad Co. 545 Change of motive power in the operation of such railroad, as from horses to electricity, does not constitute new and additional burden upon the street.
One who was extradited from N. Y. to Ky., was served with sum- mons in a civil action while passing through Ohio on his way home, by the party who caused his extradition, and the court on motion set aside the service. Deuber Watch Co. v. Dal- zell. 227 SUNDAY LAWS-
I. In a prosecution had under sec. 7033, R. S., known as the "Sun- day Common Labor Law," it cannot be ruled as a matter of law, that shav- ing on Sunday is not a work of
necessity. Spaith v. State.
2. An information under this section, which charges no specific act of shaving, is bad for un- certainty. 3. The keeping open by a barber of his shop on Sunday, and doing the common labor of a barber therein, cannot be said, as a matter of law, to be a work of necessity, or within the purview of the Ohio Stat- utes. State v. Schuler. 806
4. Whether shaving or hair cutting on Sunday by a barber is a work of necessity or charity, within the meaning of our act prohibiting common labor on that day, depends largely upon the circumstances and facts in any given case.
5. A musical performance is neither a theatrical nor dramatic per- formance of any kind or description State v. Fennessy.
6. Section 7032a (8 O. L.. 126, passed April 9, 1881), does not forbid the giving of a musical per- formance on the first day of the week, commonly called Sunday. Ib. 7. The statutes which pro- hibits the keeping open of saloons for business, and the sale of intoxi- cating liquors, on Sunday, is a crim- inal law of the state. State v. Police Board.
8. Section II of the Dow law, 256 (85 O. L., 250), makes the keeping open on Sunday, of the doors of a place where liquor is sold a distinct offense from selling on Moliter v. State. Sunday. 9. In the law against selling 324 liquor on Sunday (85 O. L., 260). the prohibition against keeping "open" means open in such a man- ner as to induce the public to enter, as on other days, and does not make penal the opening of the door under any and all circumstances. Munze- brock v. State.
I. Sureties are favorite sub- jects of legal protection; their agree- ments are to be strictly construed, and can not be extended beyond the very letter of their contracts. Mc- Dowell v. Reese. 303
2. An agreement that the time of payment of a note may be ex- tended from time to time, does not authorize an unlimited number of extensions. Ib.
3. A verbal agreement be- tween the payee and the principal on a note, to pay 12 per cent. interest in advance for a certain time on a note calling for eight per cent. interest,
7. The court will not set set aside the decision of the board simply because it differs from it as to the weight, force and credibility of the evidence upon which the board acted and decided. Ib. 8. The board has power to take and bear evidence and to ad- minister oath to witnesses. Ib.
9 A person required to tes- tify before such board refuses to answer pertinent questions, he is liable to be indicted, and after con- viction fined or imprisoned, or both, under sec. 6906. R. S. Ib.
constitution and held by residents of this state. Probasco v. Raine. 409 12. In view of this want of power, the act of 1856 (53 O. L., 112) cannot be construed to include in its provisions, the clause of the canal act of 1825, exempting stock issued under that act from taxation. Ib.
13. So far as stockholders were concerned, the stock of 1825 was paid and extinguished, and the stock of 1856 was a new contract of loan taxation of which in no respect impaired the state's obligation under it. Ib. 14. Taxation of canal stock held by a resident of this state is not taxation of public property used ex- clusively for any public purpose. Ib. 15. Good faith in a tax return, which does not state truly the tax- able personal property held by the taxpayer because of a mistake of law honestly entertained, does not pre- vent it from being a false return with sec. 2781 as amended 83 O. L., 92, when only inaction on the part of the tax official is shown. Ib.
16. Section 2732, R. S.. ex- empts from taxation a house used exclusively for public worship and the grounds attached to it, necessary for its proper occupancy, use and en- joyment, and not leased or otherwise used with a view of profit. Church of Epiphany v. Raine. 449
17. It forms no exception that the same belongs to the worshipers as an estate of perpetual leasehold- that is by a lease for ninety-nine years and renewable forever.
18. Assessors do not possess the power to equalize the value of property, which had depreciated on account of floods; their official acts are to be embodied in their returns and nowhere else. Wagner v. Zum- stein. 515
19. The limit of 14 mills un- der sec. 2689, R. S., is not extended by a law requiring cost of intersec- tions in street improvements already ordered to be levied generally, but this is included in the 14 mills. To- ledo v. Toledo. 574 fixed by 20. The limitation secs. 1005, subd. 5, and 1006, R. S., is intended to apply only to the current expenses of the county as ordinarily understood. Dexter V. Hamilton Co. 338 21. In the county of Hamil- ton the levy of 1888 for the road and bridge fund is without authority of law. Ib.
22. Where an act provides for the construction of a road and the
« PreviousContinue » |