Vol. IV.]

DIGEST OF CASES.

[No. 1.

4. THE CONVEYANCE OF AN ESTATE AS JOINTURE, of an undivided one third of a lot of land for the life of the wife, when such lot is less than one third of the husband's lands, is prima facie not a good equitable jointure, in the absence of facts showing that the same is fair and reasonable, or of such acts of the widow as amount to an estoppel. Ib.

5. THE ANTENUPTIAL COVENANT OF A WOMAN, THAT IN CASE SHE SURVIVE HER HUSBAND SHE WILL NOT CLAIM DOWER IN HIS ESTATE,

cannot, in an action by her for dower, operate to bar such action, either by way of release or estoppel, where such antenuptial contract does not constitute either a legal or equitable bar. 1b.

EVIDENCE.

See CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, 2; DEED, 2.

FIXTURE.

FIXTURE DEFINED. The principal consideration in determining whether or not an article is a fixture is the intention of the party making the annexation. Ottumwa Woollen Mill Co. v. Hawley, S. C. Iowa, West. Jur., November, 1876.

FOREIGN LAW.

JUDGMENT. LIMITATIONS. LEX LOCI. The full faith and credit required to be given to records of judicial proceedings in another state, means that such record shall have the same effect as records of home proceedings of like nature.

In actions on such records, the statute of limitations of the state where the actions are brought must govern. That statute is a plea to the remedy, and therefore to be governed by the lex fori.

The statute of Kentucky bars any further proceeding on a judgment after fifteen years from the last execution thereon. An action in Kentucky cannot be maintained on an Ohio judgment upon which no execution had issued for more than fifteen years. Nor does it make any difference that within fifteen years the Ohio judgment has been revived in that state. Such revivor is simply a restoration of a lien, not a new judgment. McArthur v. Goddin, Ct. App. Ky., Am. Law Reg., November, 1876.

INJUNCTION.

BILLS AND NOTES. An injunction to stay proceedings in a suit at law, upon a note, ought not to be granted, at the instance of the defendant in the suit, unless after judgment or upon the terms of permitting judgment to go at law, where the bill seeks no discovery or particular relief to aid the legal defence, and shows no defence to the demand sued on other than that upon which the litigation is sought to be transferred into this court. Chadwell v. Jordon, Ch. Ct. of Nashville, Tenn., Cent. L. J., Dec. 8, 1876.

INSURANCE.

The policy

FORFEITURE FOR NON-PAYMENT OF PREMIUM NOTE. provided that in consideration of an annual cash premium of $179.55, and

Vol. IV.]

DIGEST OF CASES.

[No. 1.

an annual loan note with interest of $89.75 during ten years, it assured the life of H. for the term of life; also, that a due proportion of surplus should be returned; also, that in case of default in the payment of any premium, as many tenths of the original sum insured would be paid as there had been complete annual premiums paid. But in order to secure such proportion, all premium notes must be taken up, or the interest be paid within three months after it was due, until the notes are cancelled by returns of the surplus, or the whole policy will be forfeited, unless one or more annual payments have been made in full by cash payment, or by application of the dividend. The policy was accepted upon the following, among other conditions: If the premium or the interest on any note should not be paid on or before the time specified, the company shall only be liable for such proportional part of the sum insured as provided for above. On the policy was indorsed the statement that the dividends in the case of note policies would be first applied to the unpaid interest, and then to the notes, which were non-assessable. "This policy is nonforfeitable. Each complete yearly payment secures its proportion of the policy. If payments of premium are at any time discontinued, this policy is full paid for an amount equal to as many proportionate parts of the original insurance as there have been complete annual premiums paid at the time of such default." The note contained a promise to pay the interest annually, or the policy should be forfeited. The policy lapsed by non-payment of the fourth annual premium. The interest on the notes, amounting to $24.80, was not paid, but there was due the insured $51.15 dividend. Held, that the insured was entitled to have the unpaid interest offset by the dividend, and the forfeiture was limited to seven tenths of the original sum. Hull v. U. W. Life Ins. Co., Ins. L. J.; Cent. L. J., December 1, 1876.

JUDGMENT.
See FOREIGN LAW.

JURISDICTION.

JOINT STOCK ASSOCIATION ORGANIZED UNDER STATE LAW. A joint stock association, organized under the laws of the State of New York, with a distinct legal existence, the privilege of perpetual succession, the right of making contracts by an artificial name, and of suing and being sued in the name of its president or treasurer, is so far a citizen of that state that an action against it can be maintained by a citizen of another state in a federal court, irrespective of the citizenship of the individual members of such association. Maltz v. Am. Ex. Co., C. C. U. S. E. D. Mich., Cent. L. J., December 8, 1876.

LANDLORD AND TENANT.

MORTGAGE. LANDLORD'S LIEN ON CROP NOT IN ESSE. - R. the lessor retained a lien in the lease on the annual crops of cotton, &c., to secure the rent of $3,500 per annum (for the plantation), for the term of five years. The lessees, the third year of the term, gave a mortgage to E. & Co., for surplies furnished that year, and for an antecedent debt.

Vol. IV.]

DIGEST OF CASES.

[No. 1.

Held, that the right of the landlord was superior to that of the mortgagees, E. & Co. Everman v. Robb, S. C. Miss., Cent. L. J., November 17, 1876.

LEX LOCI.

See FOREIGN LAW.

LIMITATIONS.

See FOREIGN LAW; MUNICIPAL CORPORATION.

NOTICE OF LIEN.

MARRIED WOMAN.

See DEED, 2; DOWER.

MECHANIC'S LIEN.

PARTNERSHIP. TRANSFER OF NOTE TO MATERIAL-MAN. WHERE LIEN COVERS ONLY PART OF LAND. A notice of a mechanic's lien signed with a copartnership name, instead of with the individual names of the partners, is not invalid for that reason.

A mechanic's lien for materials furnished upon a joint contract with a copartnership, will bind the interest of one of such parties who alone has title to the real estate upon which the building was erected.

The mere transfer of a promissory note to the material-man will not release his lien, unless the same is paid at maturity, or unless it is taken in payment of the account.

The lien is not invalid, although it does not cover all the land connected with the building, to which the owner has a title deed. Smith v. Johnson, S. C. D. C., W. L. R., December 2, 1876.

MORTGAGE.

See ADMIRALTY, 5; LANDLORD AND TENANT.

LIMITATIONS.

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION.

WHERE A COUNTY OWES A DEBT, IN WRITING, which has been due for more than five years (that being the period prescribed by the state statute of limitations), but the county has paid the interest on such a debt up to within less than five years, and has otherwise within that time, in writing and repeatedly, acknowledged its liability to pay such debt: Held, that the five year statute of limitation has not barred an action for the recovery of such debt. Bd., &c. of Leavenworth v. Higginbotham, S. C. Kans., Čent. L. J., Nov. 17, 1876..

NOTARY PUBLIC.

THE SUPREME COURT D. C. WILL TAKE NOTICE OF THE AUTHORITY OF A NOTARY PUBLIC in the State of Maryland to administer an oath to an affidavit, to be used in an action pending in this jurisdiction; the same being certified by his signature and notarial seal, without any other verification that he was qualified to act as such notary. Denmead v. Maack, S. C. D. C., W. L. R., November 25, 1876.

Vol. IV.]

STATE v. NEAGLE.

[No. 1.

PARTNERSHIP.

See MECHANIC'S LIEN.

RECEIVER.

ACTION AGAINST, IN ANOTHER COURT THAN THAT BY WHICH RECEIVER HAS BEEN APPOINTED. - CONTEMPT. PRACTICE. In such cases, the proper practice is for the person having a demand against the fund in the hands of the receiver to bring his demand into the court appointing the receiver, and the court will direct him to be examined, pro interesse suo before the master, and if, upon auditing his claim, the court finds it to be a just one, it will direct the receiver to pay it without litigation; but if the court finds the claim to be a doubtful one, it will give the claimant leave to prosecute it against the receiver before some competent court, consulting herein the convenience of parties and exercising a judicial discretion. A person who brings an action in one court against a receiver appointed by another court, without the consent of the court whose officer such receiver is, is guilty of a contempt of the latter court: and this is so although such action may not result in disturbing the possession of the receiver. This doctrine applies with peculiar force to cases where suits are brought in the state courts against receivers appointed by the federal courts, in actions brought by citizens of other states, to foreclose railway mortgages. Thompson v. Scott, C. C. U. S. Iowa, Cent. L. J., November 17, 1876.

Upon the trial of one charged with having in his possession intoxicating liquors with intent to sell the same in violation of the law, the record of his previous conviction for a similar offence is admissible in evidence upon the question of intent.

And the docket entries may be read to the jury, when a more extended record has not been made.

Irregularity in the drawing of jurors is not a ground for setting aside a verdict, unless it appears that the party, moving to have the verdict set aside, was injured by the irregularity.

COMPLAINT, for search and seizure of intoxicating liquors, on appeal from the municipal court of Bath.

Vol. IV.]

NOTES OF NEW BOOKS.

[No. 1.

On the trial of the appeal, the government introduced the judge of the municipal court as a witness, who was allowed, against objection, for substance and form, to read his docket entry of a former conviction of respondent for a similar offence. After the verdict of guilty, the defendant moved to set it aside for informality in the drawing of the jurors who sat in the trial.

In the hearing of the motion, it appeared in evidence that before the jurors named therein, who were a part of the jury who rendered the verdict, were drawn, the tickets containing the names of jurors who had served within three years previous had been withdrawn from the jury box of the city of Bath, and still remained out, and the defendant had no knowledge of the fact before the verdict was rendered. The judge overruled the motion, and the defendant alleged exceptions.

W. Gilbert, for the defendant.

W. T. Hall, county attorney, for the state.

WALTON, J. Upon the trial of one charged with having in his possession intoxicating liquors with intent to sell the same in violation of law, the record of a previous conviction of a similar offence is admissible in evidence upon the question of intent. So decided in State v. Plunkett, 64 Maine, 534.

And the docket entries may be read to the jury, when a more extended record has not been made. Leathers v. Cooley, 49 Maine, 337; Pierce v. Goodrich, 47 Maine, 173; Longley v. Vose, 27 Maine, 179; Read v. Sutton, 2 Cush. 115; Pruden v. Alden, 23 Pick. 184.

Irregularity in the drawing of jurors is not a ground for setting aside a verdict, unless it appears that the party moving to have the verdict set aside was injured by the irregularity. R. S. c. 82, § 78; R. S. c. 134, § 20. No such injury appears in this case.

Exceptions overruled. Judgment on the verdict. APPLETON, C. J., DICKERSON, BARROWS, VIRGIN, PETERS, and LIBBEY, JJ., concurred.

NOTES OF NEW BOOKS.

THE CENTRAL LAW JOURNAL is now published, as well as edited, by Mr. Seymour D. Thompson. This journal has many claims to excellence. It has been edited with great judgment, and merits the cordial support of the Bar in the East, no less than the West.

FREEMAN ON EXECUTIONS. San Francisco: Sumner, Whitney, & Co. Perhaps no more comprehensive criticism of this volume could be made than to state that it is done in the same manner and probably as well as the author's work on JUDGMENTS. It is perspicuous, exhaustive, and as near what such a treatise ought to be, in every important respect, as a very exacting lawyer would require. It is manifestly in advance of the average law book of the day.

OTTO'S REPORTS of the Decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States. Vol. II. of Judge Otto's Reports has been issued by Messrs. Little, Brown, & Co.

CURTIS ON COPYRIGHTS, which has been promised by the same house for a long time, is said to be in press and about to be published.