Page images
PDF
EPUB

HUGHES V. DETROIT, GRAND HAVEN & MILWAUKEE RAILWAY
COMPANY,

Negligence case-Appellate court does not concern itself
with errors claimed to have been committed against the
non-appealing party-A plaintiff has a right to at least
attempt to try his case upon his own theory-Knowl-
edge by his counsel that the trial court will not permit
certain questions to be answered cannot affect his right
to ask them-Every presumption is in favor of the cor-
rectness of a verdict-When the jury is polled is the
time for a juror to protest against the verdict as
announced.

HUNN V. MICHIGAN CENTRAL RAILROAD COMPANY,

Fellow-servants-A train dispatcher who has absolute control over the running of trains over a division of a railroad, is not a fellow-servant with employés acting under his orders-Contributory negligence, to defeat a right of action, must be that of the party injured-Mortality tables are not conclusive evidence of life expectancyWhether damages found by a jury are excessive or not does not present a question of law-Evidence of the pecuniary means of the husband, at the time of his death, is inadmissible in a suit to recover damages for the loss sustained by such death-A declaration which states a cause of action, and is not demurred to, is sufficient after verdict-Master and servant-Duty and rights of discussed.

HUTCHINSON V. POYER,

PAGE

Evidence of value of stock of goods-Opinion of dealer who was present when goods were inventoried, but did not make a sufficient examination to give an opinion as to their exact value, is admissible-Weight of is for the jury-Price goods brought at auction has some tendency to prove value-In a suit by a vendee against the vendor's attaching creditors, proof by plaintiff of sale to him of the goods will not make a prima facie case, if other facts are shown by his testimony which might have weight with the jury in determining the bona fides of the purchase.

B

399

513

337

[merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small]

JENKS & Co., FAY & Co. v.,
JUDGE OF SUPERIOR COURT OF GRAND RAPIDS, DORLAND V.,

K.

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors]
[merged small][ocr errors]

Judgment creditor's bill-To subject a mortgage executed to the debtor, and changed after delivery so as to make his wife the mortgagee, to the satisfaction of the judgment-Change held to have been made with fraudulent

[merged small][ocr errors]

Partnership-Duty of surviving partner defined-If he is administrator of estate of co-partner, he assumes new duties as trustee, and if he neglects to account for assets he may be charged with their highest proved value, and for all rents and profits lost through his neglect, or with interest on capital of deceased partner.

KING, LIVERNOIS V.,

KINNEY V. FOLKERTS,

Negligence case-Lack of vigilance by plaintiff-If caused by act of defendant is not a bar to plaintiff's claimEarning capacity of plaintiff-Jury cannot give an amount which, placed at interest, would produce the amount representing the loss in such capacity.

KNORR V. MACOMB CIRCUIT JUDGE,

Highways-How. Stat. § 6815, confers on justices of the peace, at best, but a concurrent jurisdiction with the circuit court in actions for obstructions to highways-In such an action in the circuit court, where the only mat

58

98

249

330

687

168

Knorr v. Macomb Circuit Judge-Continued.

ter in issue, by the proofs, is whether or not the particular spot where the obstruction was placed was in the public highway, as constituted by user, which is determined in plaintiff's favor, he is entitled to costs under How. Stat. § 8964, although the judgment is less than $100.

PAGE

L.

LEASIA, CURTIS V.,

LEATON V. MURPHY,

Taxes-Seizure by town treasurer of two horses, not a matched team, either one of which is worth more than the amount of the tax-Sale of both, without offering them separately, is illegal.

LEBANON TOWNSHIP, BURCH V.,

[merged small][ocr errors][merged small]
[ocr errors]
[merged small][ocr errors]

480

77

641

221

48

492

606

205

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

LITTLE V. STREET RAILWAY COMPANY OF GRAND RAPIDS, Negligence case-Error to direct verdict on account of plaintiff's contributory negligence, when, to do so, the court must assume that he must have heard or seen what other unimpeached witnesses did not hear or see. LIVERNOIS ESTATE, IN RE,

LIVERNOIS V. KING,

[ocr errors]

330

[ocr errors]

330

Parent and child-Right of parent to child's services, and liability for his support, are reciprocal-Parent, who is also guardian, and in receipt of child's services, will not be allowed for care and support of child.

[merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]

MACOMB V. PRENTIS,

Mortgage-This case involves the right of a mortgagee,
who receives an assignment of another mortgage as col-
lateral security, under an agreement to pay all taxes
assessed upon the premises covered by the assigned mort-
gage after the assignment, to recover, on a foreclosure
of such agreement, for money paid for prior outstanding
tax titles and taxes; and it is held that the assignor
could not be made so liable without an express agree-
ment.

[blocks in formation]

Landlord and tenant-Fraudulent concealment from tenant
of the polluted condition of water in a well on the leased
premises, the cause of which the landlord fails to remove,
will subject landlord to damages for injuries naturally
following the use of such water-Tenant is justified in
vacating premises, if cause of pollution cannot be
removed-Its presence amounts to an eviction, relieving
tenant from payment of rent after removal from premises
-Tenant may recoup expenses of sickness resulting from
use of water in suit to recover rent.

[merged small][ocr errors]

PAGE

255

685

377

135

[ocr errors][merged small]

Statute of frauds-Verbal agreement to purchase land, and convey it in payment of commissions on land sale, is void under.

[merged small][ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small]

Negligence case-Injury by escape of steam and water from boiler caused by the breaking of a bridge over which it was being hauled-Such breaking is the proximate cause of such escape-If the breaking was caused by internal defect in bridge-stringer, of which the township officers were ignorant, the question for the jury is whether they used due diligence in discovering such defect-Court should distinguish in his charge between negligence causing, and that which contributed to, the

McKeller v. Township of Monitor-Continued.

PAGE

injury-Right of action for injury to person or property, under Act No. 264, Laws of 1887, caused by failure to keep highway in repair, only exists when highway has been in use for ten years-Duty imposed by said act may be enforced by information or indictment in such excepted cases.

MCLAIN, KILLEFER V.,

MELLIS V. RACE,

Constitutional law-Mechanics' lien law of 1887, unconstitu-
tional.

MESSMORE V. CUNNINGHAM,

Statute of frauds-Memorandum must contain the substan-
tial terms of the contract, so expressed as to be understood
without resort to parol evidence-A tenant's continuance
in a possession held under a lease at the date of his agree-
ment with the landlord to purchase, is not an act of part
performance-Specific performance-If bill and answer
make an enforcible agreement, which, without the
admissions of the answer, is void under the statute of
frauds, the equities of complainant, thus established, can-
not override the legal title of an intervening purchaser
with notice of the void contract.

MICHIGAN CENTRAL RAILROAD COMPANY, HUNN v.,
MICHIGAN CONDENSED MILK COMPANY V. WILCOX,

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

Witness-Relation of witness to party litigant, interest in
suit, and part taken in its prosecution may be shown as
affecting his credibility-Expert witness-May be cross-
examined as to results of comparisons and tests upon
which he bases his opinion.

[merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors]

249

80

623

513

431

[ocr errors]

176

77

Equity-Bill by husband to set aside deeds to his son-
Unsecured agreement from son for father's life support is
unconscionable, unless very evidently safe.

17

« PreviousContinue »