ASSAULT.

800 CRIMINAL LAW, 686; TRESPASS, 364.

ASSESSMENT.

See TAXATION, 809.

ATTORNEY AND CLIENT.

Contract for contingent fee.] A contract by an attorney at law to render ser-
vices for a fee contingent upon success in the cause is valid and enforce-
able, although it was understood that the attorney would be and he was a
witness for his client upon the trial. Perry v. Dicken (105 Penn. St. 83), 181.

BAILMENT.

Estoppel of bailee to allege ownership.] Where one borrows property, with-
out alleging any right to it, he is estopped from setting up a claim to it on
behalf of his wife. Pulliam v. Burlingame (81 Mo. 111), 229.

BANK.

1. Action on check-acceptance.] A bank is not liable to an action upon a
check drawn upon it by a depositor unless it has accepted it, and accept-
ance is a question of fact. Northumberland Bank v. McMichael (106 Penn.
St. 460), 529.

2. Savings — duty of depositor to produce book.] A savings bank deposit-
book provided that no payment should be made without the production of
the book. The depositor died, and his family refused to give the book to
the administrator. Held, that he could recover the deposit without pro-
ducing the book and without giving a bond of indemnity. Palmer v.
Providence Institution for Savings (14 R. I. 68), 341.

See CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, 851.

BASTARD.

Guardian — application for.] The father of a bastard may properly apply for
the appointment of a guardian for him. Pote's Appeal (106 Penn. St. 574),
540.

BOND.

See NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS, 191.

CARRIER.

-

1. Connecting line-baggage presumption.] Where baggage, for the
transportation of which over three connecting railroads, operated by sep-
arate and independent companies, through checks have been issued by
one of the terminal roads, is shown to have been in good condition when
delivered to the intermediate road, but damaged when delivered at the
destination, it does not devolve on the intermediate road, in the absence
of any special contract or arrangement between the companies, to show
that it was in good condition when delivered to the last terminal road.
Montgomery & Eufaula Railway Company v. Culver (75 Ala. 578), 483.

-

2. Connecting line — limited ticket over - expiring on Sunday.] Where
railway ticket over connecting lines is limited to a specified number of days.
the last day falling on Sunday, and the last line runs no train on that day,
the passenger is entitled to passage on the next day. Little Rock & Fort
Scott Railway v. Dean (43 Ark. 529), 584.

3. Neglect of railway conductor to wake passenger.] A railway company is
not liable for the neglect of its conductor to fulfill his promise to wake a
passenger, whereby he is carried beyond his destination.
Nunn v.

Georgia Railroad (71 Ga. 710), 284.

4. Of cattle — duty to "bed " cars.] The shipper of cattle by railway, hav-
ing assumed, by special contract, the duty of loading and unloading, and
having accepted and loaded a car without objection, knowing that it was
not "bedded," cannot hold the railroad company for negligence in failing
to bed or for insufficient bedding of the car. East Tennessee, Virginia &
Georgia Railroad Company v. Johnston (75 Ala. 596), 489.

5.

custom.] Evidence of a custom of shippers of cattle to bed the cars,
known to them and acted on by them in previous shipments, is competent
to explain such contract. Id.

exemption.] An exception imposed by a carrier of cattle, relieving
him from all liability for negligence less than gross, is invalid. Id.
7. Payment of excessive charges — recovery.] If one to procure the trans-
portation of goods by railroad pays illegal rates under protest, he may
recover them, even although by arrangement the payments were made
monthly. Peters v. Railroad Company (42 Ohio St. 275), 814.

8. Statute prohibiting restriction of liability - insurance.] A statute forbid-
ding common carriers to impose restrictions of their liability is not infringed
by a provision in a bill of lading that the carrier shall have the benefit
of any insurance to the owner on the freight. British & Foreign Marine
Insurance Co. v. Gulf, C. & S. F. Railway Company (63 Tex. 475), 661.
See NEGLIGENCE, 239.

CONFLICT OF LAWS.

Insolvency laws.] In insolvency proceedings in Pennsylvania trustees were
vested with all a debtor's estate. Creditors residing in that State gar-
nished residents of Illinois indebted to the debtor. Held, that the lien
of the latter creditors should be enforced to the exclusion of such trustees.
Rhawn v. Pearce (110 Ill. 350), 691.

CONSIGNMENT.

See SALE, 51.

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW.

1. Adulteration — rule of evidence.] A statute forbade the possession, with
intent to sell or exchange, of adulterated milk. A subsequent statute
provided that milk should be deemed adulterated if it contained more
than eighty-eight per cent of watery fluids, or less than twelve per cent
of milk solids, or less than two and a half per cent of milk fats. Held,
constitutional. State v. Smyth (14 R. I. 100), 344.

2. "Banking powers."] Associations with banking powers are only banks
of issue. Dearborn v. Northwestern Savings Bank (42 Ohio St. 617), 851.
3. Denying right to vote for all candidates.] A statute authorizing the elec-
tion of four members of a police board in a city, but denying the right to
any voter to vote for more than two candidates, is unconstitutional.
v. Constantine (42 Ohio St. 437), 833.

4.

State

"Emoluments". board of prisoners by sheriff.] Where the sheriff is
bound to board his prisoners, the compensation provided therefor by law
is an
emolument," not to be changed during his term. Apple v. County
of Crawford (105 Penn. St. 242), 205.

6. Fishery contract - enforcement-comity.] The Virginia statute, for-
bidding non-residents to catch fish for the manufacture of manure and
oil, and to manufacture manure and oil from fish caught within the
waters of that State, is not unconstitutional, and a contract to be executed
wholly in Virginia in violation of it will not be enforced in Rhode Island,
nor will an account of profits of such a contract there be adjudged.
Brothers v. Church (14 R. I. 398), 410.

6. Forbidding sale of intoxicants between certain hours.] A statute pro-
hibiting the sale of intoxicating liquors between eleven o'clock, P. M. and
five o'clock, A. M., is constitutional. Hedderich v. State (101 Ind. 564),
768.

7. Governor's power to remove officers.] In the absence of express consti-
tutional authority, the legislature cannot confer on the governor power to
remove State or county officers, arbitrarily and without hearing. Dullam
v. Willson (53 Mich. 392), 128.

8. Illegal voting — retroactive provision.] The Constitution of 1875 denied
the privilege of voting to those “who shall have been convicted of treason,
embezzlement of public funds, malfeasance in office, larceny," etc. The
former Constitution contained no such provision. Weld, that one convicted
of larceny in 1871 might be punished, under the statute against illegal
voting, for voting in 1884. Washington v. State (75 Ala. 582), 479.

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW Continued.

-

-

9. Impairing contract — judgment.] A judgment for a tort is not a "contract
within the provision of the Federal Constitution forbidding the States to
pass laws impairing the obligation of contracts. McAfee v. Covington
(71 Ga. 272), 263.

10. Right to have witness present — offer to admit what he would testify.]
A statute providing that on a criminal trial, when the defendant moves
for an adjournment on the ground of the absence of a material witness,
the trial may proceed on the public prosecutor's stipulating to admit that
the witness if present would testify as set forth in the affidavits, and that
such statement might be read as his evidence, is not unconstitutional.
State v. Jennings (81 Mo. 185), 236.

11. Title of statute.] An act entitled to prohibit the sale of intoxicating
liquors within certain limits is not unconstitutional, as referring to more
than one subject or containing matter different from the title, because it
also provides against the sale of Plantation Bitters or other intoxicating
bitters sold under the name of patent medicines. Howell v. State (71 Ga.
224), 259.

12. Trial by jury.] A statute rendering railroad companies liable for cattle
killed by them, at a valuation to be conclusively fixed by appraisers, is
unconstitutional as denying the right to a trial by jury. Graves v. Northern
Pacific Railroad Company (5 Mont. 556), 81.

13.

drawing juror.] The legislature may authorize the drawing of jurors
by a board of commissioners to be appointed by the governor. People v.
Harding (53 Mich. 48), 95.

See MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, 698.

CONTRACT.

1. Gaming-illegality.] A promissory note given for losses in a speculation
in cotton "futures" is void even in the hands of an innocent purchaser.
Cunningham v. National Bank of Augusta (71 Ga. 400), 266.

2. Mutuality.] A contract by which one engages to deliver to the other such
quantities of coal as he may require during the year, up to a specified
limit, at a specified price, but containing no engagement on the part of the
buyer to take or pay for any, is not enforceable against the promisor.
Campbell v. Lambert (36 La. Ann. 35), 1.

3. Place of sale.] Davidson, at Ozark, sent a written order, to Carl & Toby,
merchants at Little Rock, to send him one gallon of whisky by express,
C. O. D. It was sent accordingly, the sellers agreeing with the express
company that if it was not taken within thirty days, it might be returned
and they would pay freight both ways. Davidson received and paid for it.
Held, a sale at Little Rock. State v. Carl (43 Ark. 353), 565.

4. Promise to pay by will.] An instrument reading thus: "I promise Emily
Caviness to give her $2,000 at my death to take care of her children with,
which she claims of my estate. She has been in my family nineteen years
and a faithful servant and it is my will to her," is not a promissory note, but
is a valid and enforceable contract. Caviness v. Rushton (101 Ind. 500), 759.

5. Unconscionable.] The complainant, of improvident habits and inex-
perienced in business, applied to defendant, a broker from whom he had
previously borrowed, for the loan of $1,000 on the security of an undivided
interest in real estate worth $10,000. The defendant objected to the se-
curity, prolonged the negotiations for a month, and finally lent him $2,000
on his note and the said security, payable in six months, with interest at
five per cent a month, payable monthly in advance till the principal should
be paid, whether at or after maturity, and all installments of interest in
arrear to bear interest at the same rate till paid. The legal rate of in-
terest was six per cent in absence of different agreement. Held, an uncon-
scionable contract, and that a reasonable rate of interest not less than six
per cent should be ascertained and fixed. Brown v. Hall (14 R. I. 249),
375.

See CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, 410; EXECUTION, 618.

CONTRACTOR.

See MASTER and Servant, 269.

CONVERSION.

See INFANCY, 340; STOCK 91.

CORPORATION.

1. Agent - compensation.] In the absence of contract, the managing director
of a steamboat company, acting as captain of one of the boats, is entitled
to compensation for laborious and responsible services according to cus-
tom and value, where he has retained such amount from the company's
funds and this has been acquiesced in by the directors. New Orleans, etc.,
Packet Company v. Brown (36 La. Ann. 138), 5.

2. Club — expulsion — jurisdiction.] The plaintiff was expelled from a
social club without notice. The club was incorporated, but had no stock
nor property. The by-laws did not call for notice. Held, that the courts
could give him no relief. Manning v. San Antonio Club (63 Tex. 166),
639.

3. Insolvency-claims of creditors on unpaid subscriptions.] On the in-
solvency of a corporation, uncalled and unpaid subscriptions to stock con-
stitute a trust fund for all the creditors, and cannot be attached by a judg-
ment-creditor. Lane's Appeal (105 Penn. St. 49), 166.

4. Mandamus by stockholder.] A stockholder in a private corporation, al-
leging misconduct in its affairs, being refused access to the books and in-
formation concerning its affairs, may have a mandamus to compel the pro-
duction of its books and papers to enable him to ascertain and secure his
rights. Commonwealth v. Phanix Iron Company (105 Penn. St. 111), 184.
See FRAUD, 508.

CRIMINAL LAW.

1. Assault — intent.] One unlawfully firing at A. and missing him and hitting
B., may be punished for assault with intent to kill B. Dunaway v. People

(110 Ill. 333), 686.