Sadowski v. Michigan Car Company-Continued.
negligence of a fellow-servant has no application unless
the two employés are engaged in the same general
employment-The true rule seems to be that those
employed to provide or keep in repair the place, or to
supply the machinery or tools, for labor, are engaged in
a different employment from those who use such place or
appliances, and are not, as to each other, fellow-serv-
ants-In this case a common laborer employed in a
lumber-yard is held not to have been a fellow-servant
with the yard foreman and his men, who, by direction
of the superintendent, dug a ditch in which to lay a
water-pipe, and left it uncovered, whereby the laborer
was injured.
SAGINAW CITY, CARLISLE V...
SANILAC COUNTY SUPERVISORS, SHERMAN V.
SCALLY, BLAISDELL V................
SCHEHR V. LOOK.............
Will-Giving executors power to sell testator's estate, with direction to invest proceeds in specified securities, and bequeathing the income of the estate, and the interest arising from such investments, to his wife for her use during her natural life, with remainder to his children, who were to be supported by the widow out of such income and interest-Widow's interest is limited to the use of the estate during her natural life. SEATON V. PERE MARQUETTE BOOM COMPANY..
Log-running company-In absence of contract with logowner, is left, under the statute, to run such of his logs as obstruct the stream for a reasonable compensation-Can charge for no more logs than are delivered, unless it can show that the others were lost without its fault, on which issue it has the burden of proof-On the facts of this case it is held that the minds of the parties did not so meet as to make an agreement for final settlement by the woods scale.
SECRETARY OF STATE, ADSIT V................
SHERMAN V. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF SANILAC COUNTY..... 108
Tax law of 1889-Makes no provision for clerk's fees for
Sherman v. Board of Supervisors of Sanilac County.
issuing subpoenas to delinquent tax-payers-Mandamus may lie to compel respondent to act under section 100, and determine what compensation, if any, the clerk shall receive for his services, and how it shall be paid. SLIGH V. CITY OF GRAND RAPIDS....
Constitutional law-Amendments of a city charter giving
damages to parties injured by the regrading of streets,
and providing for their ascertainment and assessment,
are within the general purposes of the charter, which is
silent as to such damages-Act providing for assess-
ments for the payment of such damages is inoperative
if it fails to provide for notice to the parties assessed.
SLOMAN, AUDITOR GENERAL V..
SMITH, STRONG V...........
SMITH V. WAYNE CIRCUIT JUDGE...
Assignment for benefit of creditors-Complainant is guilty
of contempt in filing a bill to enjoin a sale of the
assigned property on the ground of the invalidity of the
assignment in a circuit other than that having jurisdic-
tion of the assignment proceedings-Validity of assign-
ment will not be tried on an application for mandamus
to vacate an order adjudging him guilty of such con-
tempt.
SMITH MIDDLINGS PURIFIER COMPANY, PRESTON NATIONAL
BANK V.
SOOTSMA, KALAMAZOO HACK & BUS COMPANY V..
SPALDING V. CHANDLER..
Indian reserve at Sault Ste. Marie-Not subject to pre-
emption under law of 1841–Rights secured to Chippewa
Indians in said reserve under the treaty of June 16, 1820,
were perpetual, and were exclusive after the reserve
was set apart to them for a place of encampment―The
voluntary cession of the land to the United States by
the Indians was essential to deprive it of its character
as an Indian reserve.
SPAULDING V. CITY OF SAGINAW.
See Carlisle v. City of Saginaw.
STANDARD LIFE & ACCIDENT INSURANCE COMPANY, COOK V...
STARKEY, WESTERN WOODEN-WARE ASSOCIATION V.
Action-By defendant to recover damages for the service of a summons by a private person, not properly designated for that purpose under the statute-Judgment for costs in defendant's favor, on the rever: al of such a judgment, is the measure of such damages. STOCKWELL, WAYNE COUNTY SAVINGS BANK V.. STRONG V. SMITH............
Will-Devise of land in equal shares to the testator's brothers and sisters and to those of his wife, without naming them-Surviving issue of the first-named class will take the estate devised to their parents respectively. SUPERVISORS OF MIDLAND COUNTY, AUDITOR GENERAL V................ SUPERVISORS OF SANILAC COUNTY, SHERMAN V...............
THOMPSON V. LAKE SHORE & MICHIGAN SOUTHERN RAILWAY
COMPANY
Negligence-Previous negligence of a railroad engineer is
not important unless he is shown to have been negligent
at the time of the accident complained of.
TICE V. BAY CITY......
Municipal corporations-Defective sidewalk-Evidence-
Charge to jury.
Evidence-Statements of one partner that notes given by him in firm name were used in his private business, made after the notes were given and not in the presence of the payees, are not competent evidence of such fact in a suit upon the notes-If payees have knowledge of manner in which notes were given the other partners are not bound unless they assent thereto-Such assent may be shown by circumstances, like any other fact
Towle v. Dunham-Continued.
Directing verdict-Improper where there is some evi-
dence to go to the jury in support of the theory of the
party against whom it is directed, and which, if sus-
tained, entitles him to a recovery.
Town v. MICHIGAN CENTRAL RAILROAD COMPANY.
Railroad companies-Reopening and using switch, without
replacing lights, and without notice to or knowledge of
engineers-Held negligence, if the presence of the lights
would have prevented the engineer from running train
into the switch which is a question for the jury, if the
testimony is conflicting-If such reopening and use was
by direction of the division superintendent, acting as
agent for the company, it became its duty to notify
engineers or restore the lights, if not to do both, and a
failure so to do would be its negligence, and not that
of the section master.
TREASURER OF WAYNE COUNTY, CITY SAVINGS BANK V......
TRUAX, MILLARD V.......
TUBBS V. DWELLING-HOUSE INSURANCE COMPANY..
Fire insurance-Mistake of agent in stating amount of
incumbrance in application, it being correctly given to
him by the applicant-In absence of negligence on part
of applicant such error will not affect his rights under
the policy-Proofs of loss-Failure to furnish within the
prescribed time will only postpone right of action until
they are supplied, if the time for bringing suit is not
limited, nor forfeiture provided for-Including articles
not owned by assured in good faith and on the suppo-
sition that they are covered by the policy will not in-
validate it—Jury-Discretionary with the court to allow
exhibits, which have been fully proven, and admitted
in evidence, and whose authenticity is unquestioned, to
be taken to the jury-room-Error in instructing jury as
to amount plaintiff can recover under a clause in the
policy is non-prejudicial if the conceded loss thereunder
exceeds the amount stated by the court-If jury dis-
regard the charge limiting the amount recoverable under
a clause of the policy to a sum less than that covered
by the clause, and render a verdict for the greater sum,
Tubbs v. Dwelling-house Insurance Company-Continued.
the error will be corrected in the appellate court, if
application was not made below for such correction.
VAN BRUNT, ASHOFF V..
VAN TASSEL, NORTH V.....
VILLAGE OF GRANDVILLE V. JENISON'
Highways-Parties who act independently in obstructing
a street need not be joined in a suit to remove an
obstruction maintained by one of them-Failure for 20
years to accept an offer to dedicate land for a street,
and its after occupancy for 14 years by the owner of
the land to which the easement was appurtenant in such
a way as to indicate a denial of any right of the public
therein, will estop the public from asserting such right
-Adoption by the public of a street laid out in fact,
but not legally under the statute, and its use to the full
extent that the public had occasion to use it for the
statutory period, will constitute it a highway by user-
Evidence of a general understanding in the community
that such a street was a highway, and of the exemption
of the land from assessment on that ground, is admissi-
ble to show its public character-Rights of public in
highway will not be lost by any thing short of an
actual abandonment of the use by which they secured
it-Statutory and common-law dedication discussed.
WAYNE CIRCUIT JUDGE, SMITH V...................
WAYNE COUNTY SAVINGS BANK V. STOCKWELL..
Highway by user-Need not necessarily be of the statu-
tory width-Becomes such to the width and extent used
-Highway can be lost in whole or in part by non-user
-Non-user of a portion will not affect the remainder of
WAYNE COUNTY TREASURER, CITY SAVINGS BANK v...
WEBB, BALLENTINE V......
'Rehearing granted at April term, 1891.
|