« PreviousContinue »
wmmits a wrong imminently dangerous to on her former husband's life, that, by virtue human life, within the rule that one guilty of the Hawaiian laws and the decree of diof such an act may be liable for injury to vorce thereunder, all her rights in such pollife or property thereby caused, even to per- icy had passed to and become the property
not immediately connected with the of her husband, is not the special assertion transaction.
Id. of a right or claim under the treaty with NOTES AND BRIEFS.
Hawaii, which is essential, under U. S. Rev.
Stat. $ 709 (U. S. Comp. Stat. 1901, p. Animals; liability for permitting tres- 575), to confer jurisdiction on the Supreme pass of diseased cattle upon lands of an- Court of the United States to review a judgother; duty to prevent diseased animals ment of a state court adverse to such right from coming in contact with other animals; or claim. Mut. L. Ins. Co. v. McGrew (U. sale of diseased animals with knowledge of S. Sup. Ct.)
33 their condition; liability for damages re- 2. A decision of a state court cannot be sulting from spread of disease; effect of in- reviewed in the Supreme Court of the Unittervention of independent owner between ed States as a denial of full faith and credit original vendor and person whose animals to an Hawaiian judgment, where the Fedare affected; proximate cause of injury. eral right did not exist when judgment of
744 the trial court was rendered because the ANNUITIES.
Hawaiian islands had not then been an1. An annuity is not apportionable, even nexed to the United States, and such conwhen given to a widow in lieu of dower; so tention was not brought to the attention of that her death pending a yearly period will the highest state court in any form. Id. terminate all claim to any portion of the sum which would have become payable at the claim that, under Mexican and Spanish
3. A decision of a state court adverse to the termination of that period. Mower v. Sanford (Conn.)
grants confirmed and patented under the 625
act of Congress of March 3, 1851 (9 Stat. at 2. An annuity out of the yearly income of L. 631, chap. 41), the owners of the land a farm is payable at the end of the year. were entitled to riparian rights and subterHenry v. Henderson (Miss.)
ranean waters, involves no Federal question 3. An annuity created by will, to be paid reviewable in the Supreme Court of the to an adult during the lifetime of the hus- United States, where the validity of such band of the testatrix, is not apportionable act was not drawn in question. Hooker r. in the absence of anything in the will to in- Los Angeles (U. S. Sup. Ct.)
471 dicate such an intent; and, in case the hus- 4. Questions under the state Constitution band dies before the first payment becomes and laws cannot be considered on a writ of due, the annuitant will receive nothing. Id. error to a state court, as they might be on
4. An annuity to take effect from and error to an inferior Federal court. Misafter the death of the donor is payable, not souri ex rel. Hill v. Dockery (U. S. Sup. in advance, but at the termination of the Ct.)
571 yearly periods commencing with his death. 5. A taxpayer who admits that his own Mower v. Sanford (Conn.)
625 tax is correct cannot, on the ground that he NOTES AND BRIEFS.
will be deprived of his property without due
process of law, and denied the equal protecAnnuities; apportionment of.
tion of the laws, contrary to the 14th Apportionment of annuities in absence of Amendment of the Constitution of the statute:-(I.) General rule; (II.) excep- United States, have a writ of error from the tions: (a) annuity created for mainte- United States Supreme Court to review a nance; (6) consideration passing from an construction by the supreme court of the nuitant: (1) in lieu of dower; (2) other state of the statutes thereof, as exempting consideration; (III.) special instances; in whole or in part certain corporations (IV.) interest; (V.) conclusion. 616 from the payment of taxes.
When Federal question must be See PLEADING, 7-9.
6. A Federal question first raised in a ANTI-TRUST ACT.
petition for rehearing in the highest state See MONOPOLIES.
court is raised too late to confer jurisdic
tion upon the Supreme Court of the United APPEAL AND ERROR.
States, where such petition was denied Jurisdiction of United States Su-without opinion. Mut. L. Ins. Co. v. Mepreme Court.
Grew (U. S. Sup. Ct.)
33 1. An averment in an answer in a suit How Federal question must be raised. by a divorced wife on a policy of insurance 7. A judgment of a state court cannot be reviewed in the Supreme Court of the proceeding for a new accounting, but must United States on the ground that it denied I come in under the former decree, present a a right, title, privilege, or immunity secured question of law for the appellate court. Re by the Federal Constitution, where it does Killan's Estate (N. Y.)
95 not appear on the face of the record that
15. An objection to the competency of such right, title, privilege, or immunity was evidence is not sufficient to raise the quesspecially set up or claimed in the state tion of the competency of the witness, where court. Home for Incurables v. New York the evidence is competent, but the witness (U. S. Sup. Ct.)
329 | is under statutory disability to testify to 8. A certificate of the chief judge of the the facts. Hoag v. Wright (N. Y.) 163 highest state court that a Federal question 16. A general exception to the overruling was involved is not properly a part of the of separate demurrers to several paragraphs record, and is insufficient in itself to confer of complaint presents no question for the jurisdiction on the Supreme Court of the court on appeal. Southern Indiana R. Co. United States to review a judgment of the v. Harrell (Ind.)
460 state court or to determine Federal ques: Discretionary decision. tions which do not appear from the record
17. The discretion of the trial judge to to have been brought to the attention of that court.
determine partiality or impartiality in a Id.
jury is subject to review on appeal under a 9. A judgment of a state court in con- constitutional guaranty to the accused of a demnation proceedings is not reviewable in trial by an impartial jury. State v. Stentz the Supreme Court of the United States on
807 the theory that a question respecting due process of law was decided thereby, where Hearing and determination in gen
eral. there is nothing in the record which adequately shows that the state court was led tion to plaintiff by the trial court, after is
18. The granting of a temporary injuncto suppose that any claim was made under the Constitution of the United States, or davits of both parties, is, for the purpose of
sue joined, and upon the pleadings and affithat any ruling involved a decision against a right set up under that instrument. reviewing the action of the court, deemed to Hooker v. Los Angeles (U. S. Sup. Ct.) 471 be, in effect, a finding that the allegations
of the complaint upon which the writ is Record. 10. The supreme court has no authority the order granting the writ, the appellate
prayed for are true; and, upon appeal from to heed instructions requested by the par court will review the affidavits only to the ties, spread upon the minutes of the court, extent of determining whether they fairly and copied into the transcript by the clerk tend to support the allegations of the comof his own motion without authority. Lake Erie & W. R. Co. v. Holland (Ind.)
plaint. Gray v. Building Trades Council 948 (Minn.)
753 11. Objection to the giving or refusing of
19. Errors in rulings at a trial upon a instructions found in the record cannot be considered by the supreme court, where the plea to the jurisdiction in which a judgrecord affirmatively shows that all the in- ment of respondeat ouster is reached are structions given are not in it.
open upon appeal from a final judgment
against defendant, without the necessity of Raising questions in lower court.
a separate appeal therefrom. Gambrill v. 12. That the death of deceased was not
427 produced solely by the act of accused cannot be raised as a defense to a prosecution for
Prejudicial error. murder for the first time on a petition for of murder in the first degree is not rever:
20. Submission to the jury of the issue rehearing in the appellate court under the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure. White sible error where accused is found guilty of v. State (Tex. Crim. App.)
murder in the second degree, thereby acquit
660 13. The question of whether a petition State (Tex. Crim. App.)
ting him of the higher charge. White v.
660 states a cause of action, or discloses grounds sufficient for the granting of equitable re
21. A refusal to sustain challenges for lief, may be raised at any stage of the pro- proper cause, necessitating peremptory chalceedings in the appellate court, up to and lenges on the part of the accused, will be including the filing of a motion for a re-considered on appeal as prejudicial, where hearing. Vila v. Grand Island E. L. I. & the accused has been compelled subsequently C. S. Co. (Neb.)
791 to exhaust all his peremptory challenges be14. Exceptions to the conclusions of a fore the final selection of the jury. State v.
807 surrogate that the next of kin of an intes- Stentz (Wash.) tate, who was not made a party to the ad- 22. A ruling admitting competent eviministrator's accounting, cannot institute a 'dence to be given by a witness who at the time was incompetent, over the objection When finding of trial court is conclusive. that the evidence was not competent, does
748 not require a reversal where evidence sub
How and when questions must be raised sequently admitted removed the disability, and decided in a state court in order to and by a proper objection the witness might make a case for a writ of error from the Suhave been qualified before his testimony was preme Court of the United States:-(I.) received. Hoag v. Wright (N. Y.) 163
Scope of note; (II.) presentation of the 23. Rejection of evidence that one joint Federal question to the state court: (a) maker of a promissory note was financially how raised: (1) the general rules; (2) ilresponsible at the time the payee is allegedlustrative cases; (b) when presented in to have accepted his individual note in pay. time; (III.) the decision of the Federal ment of the joint note upon which the ac- question by the state court: (a) necessity tion is brought is not reversible error, al- of decision; (b) essential requisites to de though the verdict is in plaintiff's favor, cision: (1) in general; (2) application of since that fact would have no tendency to the rules to different Federal questions; (c) show that the obligation of the other re- nature of decision as affecting right of responsible makers was voluntarily surren- view; (d) decision need not be erroneous; dered. Brink v. Stratton (N. Y.) 182 (e) decision must be controlling; (IV.) 24. Ruling out a question to a motorman
33 whose car collided with a bicyclist as to What questions the Federal Supreme whether or not he would have moved his car Court will consider in reviewing the judg. forward if he thought that he was endan- ment of state courts :-(I.) The general gering life is not reversible error, where he rule; (II.) particular questions not reviewis subsequently permitted to testify that he able: (a) non-Federal questions in general; thought that by so doing he would avoid a (b) statutory construction; (c) validity of collision, and that it would be dangerous to state legislation; (d) questions not involved stop. Harrington v. Los Angeles Ry. Co. in the record; (e) questions of fact; (f) (Cal.)
238 miscellaneous; (III.) the rule where consti25. A ruling sustaining a demurrer to the tutional rights are involved: (a) impairevidence will not be reversed, notwithstand-ment of contract obligations; (b) full faith ing that sufficient evidence was actually ad- and credit; (c) due process of law; (d) mitted by the trial court to make a prima equal protection of the laws; (IV.) con
571 facie case for plaintiff, where a part of the evidence essential for that purpose was in
The record for the purpose of showing competent and admitted over proper objec- jurisdiction in the Supreme Court of the tion, although it was not formally stricken United States of a writ of error to a state out, and no notice was given plaintiff that court:-(I.) In general; (II.) findings of it was to be disregarded. Lee v. Missouri fact; (III.) opinion of state court; (IV.) P. R. Co. (Kan.)
certificate of state court; (V.) petition for 26. In an action for damages for personal writ of error; (VII.) counsel's arguments
rehearing; (VI.) petition for allowance of injuries, if the declaration shows the juris- or briefs; (VIII.) assignment of errors. diction of the court, and no plea in abate
329 ment has been filed, the judgment will not
What the record must show respecting be reversed for want of proof of the venue the presentation and decision of a Federal as laid. Snyder v. Philadelphia Co. (W.
question in order to confer jurisdiction on Va.)
the Supreme Court of the United States of 27. The allowance of bad pleas is harm
a writ of error to a state court:-(I.) Inless error, if no evidence is given under troduction; (II.) the general rules; (III.) them. Tower v. Whip (W. Va.) 937
presentation as affected by the class to 28. A party cannot complain of the which the Federal question belongs; (IV.) court's modification of an instruction to the decision of the Federal question; (V.) which he is not entitled. Harrington v. Los effect of certificate of state court; (VI.) Angeles Ry. Co. (Cal.) 238 conclusion.
471 29. Defects in portions of a charge to the Failure of special judge to take oath as jury do not require a reversal if the charge reversible error.
938 as a whole was an accurate statement of
Denial of right to open and close a case the law, and the defects could not have mis- to the jury as reversible error. 320 led the jury. State v. Power (Wash.) 902
Error in refusing to give any instruction NOTES AND BRIEFS. where petition is traversed and proof intro
647 Appeal; by distributee from decree on ac
duced in support of allegations. counting of which he had no notice. 07 Error in instructing jury that servant
assumes only the risks of which he has | BAGGAGE. knowledge.
461 Liability of Express Company in Tak
ing Wrong Baggage from Hotel, APPEARANCE.
see CARRIERS, 34. See ACTION OR SUIT, 5. APPORTIONMENT.
BANKRUPTCY. Of Annuities, see ANNUITIES, 1-4.
Permitting a mortgagee to take pos
session of mortgaged chattels after the ARREST.
mortgagor has become insolvent, under an The common-law privilege accorded unrecorded mortgage which had been in exto attorneys at law, of freedom from arrest | istence a long time, is an act of bankruptcy on civil process, should be limited to the under the act of Congress of 1898, and the time in which they are actually in attend preference thereby secured will be defeated ance upon the court in the due course of by the institution of bankruptcy proceedings their employment as attorneys. Greenleaf within four months after that time. Tatv. People's Bank (N. C.) 499 man v. Humphrey (Mass.)
738 ASSAULT AND BATTERY.
NOTES AND BRIEFS.
Liability of Carrier, see CARRIERS, take possession of chattels after insolvency
738 NOTES AND BRIEFS.
BANKS. Assault; homicide in commission of.
375, 391 1. The Kansas banking law of 1891 sus
pended the savings bank act of 1868, and ASSUMPTION OF RISK.
thereafter all savings banks previously orSee MASTER AND SERVANT, 7-15.
ganized and engaged in the business of re
ceiving money on deposit were amenable to ATTACHMENT.
its provisions. West v. Topeka Sav. Bank
137 Jurisdiction to Render Personal Judg
(Kan.) ment against Nonresident,
2. If the cashier of a bank, without JUDGMENT, 1.
actual authority so to do, undertakes to pay
his individual debts by entering the amount NOTES AND BRIEFS.
thereof as a credit upon the passbook of his Attachment; of property of nonresident; creditor, who keeps an account with the jurisdiction of court.
207 bank, the bank may. recover of his creditor
the amount of money it may put out upon , ATTEMPT.
checks drawn upon the faith of the unauNOTES AND BRIEFS.
thorized passbook entries. Hier v. Miller (Kan.)
952 Attempt; to commit crime; what consti
3. The cashier of a bank organized under tutes.
359 the laws of Kansas has no implied author
ity to pay his individual debts by entering ATTORNEY GENERAL.
the amount of them as a credit upon the Maintenance of Quo Warranto Proceed- passbook of his creditor, who keeps an acings by, see Quo WARRANTO, 1, 2
count with the bank, and permitting the
creditor to exhaust such account by checks ATTORNEYS.
which are paid, the bank having received Privilege from Arrest, see ST, 1.
nothing of value in the transaction. Id. Failure of the legislature to provide Collections. compensation for an attorney who is ap
4. A drawee bank which pays a raised pointed by the court to conduct disbarment check under the mistaken belief that it has proceedings in accordance with the pro- not been altered cannot compel the collectvisions of the statute does not absolve the ing bank to refund the excessive amount county from liability to make reasonable after it has, in good faith and without nocompensation to him for such services. tice of the fraud, turned the proceeds over Hyatt v. Hamilton County (Iowa) 614 to the payee, where the indorsement of the
collecting bank is restrictive, and the NOTES AND BRIEFS.
drawee knows that it holds the check mereAttorneys; as officers of the court. 614 ly for collection. Crocker-Woolworth Nat. Exemption, from service of process, of Bank v. Nevada Bank (Cal.)
245 nonresident attorney attending court in the interests of his clients.
500 owned by a bank, but deposited for clear.
| 5. Clearing house rules that paper not
ance, shall bear a stamped indorsement | BICYCLES. which shall guarantee the validity of all Injury to Rider by Street Car, see prior indorsements, abrogates, as between
STREET RAILWAYS, 5. members of the clearing house, a statutory Injury to Rider by Street Car, Question provision that a general indorsement war
for Jury, see TRIAL, 5.
BILL OF DISCOVERY.
To Reach Choses in Action of Judg. 6. An indorsement of a check by a bank
ment Debtor, see EQUITY, 1, holding it for collection, "for clearing house purposes only," does not constitute à rep. BILLS AND NOTES. resentation that it is its owner.
Collection of Checks by Banks, see 7. Mere presentation of a check for pay.
BANKS, 4-8. ment by a bank, which has indorsed upon it a restrictive indorsement, does not consti- by a party was procured by deception and
A plea that a negotiable note signed tute a warranty that it is what it purports fraud in representing it to be a paper of to be, and has not been altered from the different character is not good against a form in which it was originally drawn, holder for value, who acquired it in due when by statute a contract of sale does not
course of business before maturity, unless imply a warranty except as provided by the the plea aver notice to the holder of such statute, which provides that the seller of a note merely warrants that he has no knowl. note. Tower v. Whip (W. Va.)
fraud and deception before he acquired the
937 edge of defects.
Id, 8. A bank cannot recover money paid on
NOTES AND BRIEFS. a raised check from the collecting bank,
Bills and notes; right of payor of forged merely because the evidence might justify commercial paper to recover from payee; a presumption that it relied upon the rep- warranty of holder of commercial paper resentations of the latter as to the genuine that he has valid title; effect of indorsement ness of the paper, unless the evidence is con- to warrant genuineness of body of instruclusive of the fact, where it does not plead ment; effect of indorsement of instrument such reliance. Id. for collection.
245 NOTES AND BRIEFS.
BLACKLISTING. Banks; right of drawee bank paying See also MASTER AND SERVANT, 2–5. raised check to recover from payee or col
NOTES AND BRIEFS. lecting bank; effect of indorsement of instrument for collection.. 245 Blacklisting employees.
289 Right of customer to rely on honesty of
BLOODHOUNDS. bank officer; committing whole corporate
Evidence as to Conduct and Behavior authority to one officer by course of deal
in Trailing Fugitive Criminal, see ing; estoppel to claim that officer acted in
EVIDENCE, 27. excess of authority; power of cashier to bind bank by making bank contract in his
BOILERS. individual interest; effect of custom of
Conclusiveness of Report of Insurance cashier to pay individual indebtedness out
Company Showing Inspection, see of bank funds; paying individual indebted
EVIDENCE, 4. ness by entering amount in passbook of
Liability of Owner for Explosion of, creditor; balanced passbook as account stat
see EXPLOSION, 1-4. ed; passbook as receipt and subject to explanation.
953 BONA FIDE HOLDER. BASTARDY.
Of Note; Effect, as against, of Fraud
in Procuring Execution of, see NOTES AND BRIEFS.
BILLS AND NOTES, l. Bastardy; marriage of parties as bar to prosecution for.
Forthcoming Bonds, seu LEVY AND SEIZBENEVOLENT SOCIETIES.
See also EXECUTORS
TRATORS, 7. Benefit societies; issuing certificate to member as evidence of good standing; pre
NOTES AND BRIEFS. sumption of continuance of; what consti
Bonds; of coexecutors; joint and several; tutes “good standing;” how lost. 455 right of one executor as beneficiary under
Binding effect, on member, of amendment will to maintain action against sureties on of by-laws; amendment as to suicide. 347 'the bond for default of coexecutor. 235