Page images


aggravated by accident; what constitutes prove the transfers by which he claims title immediate notice of accident.

425 before he can maintain a suit thereon, if

such transfers are not admitted by defendINTEREST.

ants. Hall v. Henderson (Ala.)


4. The facts concluded by a judgment Interest; allowance of, on amount due for must be proved by the record. Gambrill v. arrearages of annuity. 629 Schooley (Md.)



Judgment; of court of one state holding

note barred by statute of limitations as bar INTOXICATING LIQUORS.

to suit in another state where action not Statute Forbidding Saloon Keepers to barred by limitations.

207 Permit Women to Enter a Saloon Conclusiveness of, between parties and as Constituting a Deprivation of their privies.

631 Equal Protection of the Laws, see

Of divorce; when becomes absolute. 960 CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, 10.

Motion to open or vacate decree as ad1. No unconstitutional discrimination dressed to the discretion of the court; right against women is made by a statute which to demand that decree be set aside; remedy forbids their entering wine rooms there to of party affected by decree. be supplied with liquor. Adams v. Cronin (Colo.)

61 JUDICIAL NOTICE. 2. A license to sell intoxicating liquors

See EVIDENCE, 5, 6. confers no vested right upon the licensee, and may be revoked before the expiration

JUDICIAL SALE. of the time for which it has been granted,

Exemption of Nonresident Attending,

from Service of Civil Process, see by act of the legislature or by municipal

officers acting under statutory authority,
with or without notice to the licensee. Wal-
lace v. Reno (Nev.)


Appearance by Nonresident as Waiver

of Objection to Jurisdiction of Intoxicating liquors; validity of ordi

Court, see ACTION OR SUIT, 5. nance imposing conditions upon traffic in;

See also Courts, 1, 2. necessity that conditions be reasonable. 62


Review of Discretion of Trial Court in Ejection of Intoxicated Person from

Determining Bias of Juror, see Train, see CARRIERS, 29–31.


Bias of Juror, see TRIAL, 3. JUDGES.

Questions for Jury, see TRIAL, 4-7. Failure to Take Oath, Effect upon Validity of Judgment, see COURTS, 5.



Personal knowledge of facts to be proved Effect of Failure of Judge to Take

as affecting competency of juror. 807 Statutory Oath, see COURTS, 5. Validity of Decree on Accounting as

LABOR ORGANIZATIONS. against One Not a Party, see Ex

Restraining Representatives from Going ECUTORS AND ADMINISTRATORS 1-4.

on to Premises for Purpose of 1. Jurisdiction to render judgment to

Ordering Men to Cease Work, see the extent of the property attached within

INJUNCTION, 5. the state may be acquired by attachment, Restraining Labor Union from Notify. although the owner is a nonresident. Brand

ing Customers that certain Firm v. Brand (Ky.)


has been Placed on the “Unfair" 2. A prayer for general equitable relief,

List, see INJUNCTION, 6. coupled with that of one for specific relief, Restraining Union from Coercing Lacannot be extended so as to warrant the

borer to Join Particular Organizagranting of relief not embraced within and

tion, see INJUNCTION, 7. comprehended by the allegations of fact

See also BOYCOTT; STRIKE. contained in the pleading. Vila v. Grand Labor organizations or unions are Island E. L. I. & C. S. Co. (Neb.) 791 not unlawful, but are legitimate and proper

3. The assignee of a judgment should 'for the advancement of their members and those dependent upon them; and the mem- | LEVY AND SEIZURE. bers thereof may, singly or in a body, quit

A claimant who gives a levying officer the service of their employer for the pura forthcoming bond, and retains possession pose of bettering their condition, and may of the property, is not liable thereon for by peaceful means persuade others to join failure to produce the property at the them, and, as a means to that end, may refuse to allow their members to work in the same officer seizes and sells the prop

time and place of sale, where subsequently places where nonunion labor is employed. erty under a lien of superior dignity, applyGray v. Building Trades Council (Minn.) ing the proceeds to such superior lien. Floyd

v. Cook (Ga.)


LIBEL AND SLANDER. Labor unions; right of men to organize;

Award of Punitive Damages, see DAMright of, to injure others in furthering their

AGES, 2. own interests; injunction to restrain boy

Admissibility of Evidence, see Evicott by.


DENCE, 33–37. LAKES.

1. No recovery can be had for injury Rights of Riparian Owners in Bed of to plaintiff's credit as a merchant, in an Lake, see WATERS, 2-4.

action for slander, in the absence of evi

dence showing that such injury had been LANDLORD AND TENANT.

sustained. Gambrill v. Schooley (Md.)

427 The owner of property is under no

2. Slanderous words obligation to exercise care and diligence to

not published, discover latent defects for the benefit of spoken by plaintiff concerning defendant in intending lessees, so as to be liable for in. a slander suit of which defendant was ignojuries to their property by reason of such rant when he spoke the words which form

the basis of the action, cannot be considered defects after they have taken possession under the lease. Franklin v. Tracey (Ky.)

by the jury for the mitigation of even punitive damages.

Id. 649

3. Proof of the utterance of other acNOTES AND BRIEFS.

tionable language is not precluded in a Landlord and tenant; liability for injury slander case by the fact that the words to tenant where landlord knew or should counted on are actionable per se, and the have known of dangerous condition when only defense is denial of speaking them, so lease was made; duty to keep premises in that the malice is admitted if the words repair; necessity of alleging actual knowl.

are found to have been spoken.

Id. edge of defect by landlord.



Libel and slander; punitive damages in One about to excavate the soil of his case of slander; when allowed; recovery for lot in such a manner as to endanger his injury to credit and reputation as neighbor's wall is bound to notify him of chant; admissibility of other written or

430 the manner and extent of the excavation, spoken words. so as to enable him to take proper measures

LICENSE. to protect the wall from injury. Davis v.

License Tax; Exemption from, as ConSummerfield (N. C.)


stituting a Denial of Equal ProtecNOTES AND BRIEFS.

tion of the Laws, see CONSTITU. Lateral support; liability of owner of soil


See also INTOXICATING LIQUORS, 2. for injury to neighbor by independent contractor in excavating; degree of care that

NOTES AND BRIEFS. should be exercised; duty to give notice of

License; right to exact license fee for car. intention to excavate; duty of neighbor rying on private agency.

76 after notice given.



See HIGHWAYS, 1-3.

Liens; of laborers; preference over all other claims.




Evidence to Identify, see EVIDENCE, 17. Relative use of life tenants and remain






derman with respect to stock dividends; | LIMITATION OF LIABILITY. conflict of laws as to.

587 Of Carrier, see CARRIERS, 9, 11.

Conflict of Laws as to Validity of Con. LIMITATION OF ACTIONS.

tract, see CONFLICT OF LAWS, 1. Conflict of Laws as to, see CONFLICT OF LAWS, 3.


Liability of Carrier for Injury to, see Reply as Proper Pleading for Alleging

Estoppel to Plead Statute of Lim-
itations, see PLEADING, 6.

MANDAMUS. 1. A railroad company which induces an

The judgment of a state board of employee to refrain from bringing suit for equalization of Missouri, which has laid a injuries, by promises to retain him on the substantial tax upon corporations therein, pay roll, pay him for the injurieɛ, and give is final under the Missouri Constitution and him a life job, which promises are fulfilled

statutes. Missouri ex rel. Hill v. Dockery until after the statute of limitations has (U. S. Sup. Ct.)

571 run, when payment for the injuries is refused and he is discharged, is estopped to MANSLAUGHTER. plead the statute to a suit for the injuries. See HOMICIDE, 6, 7. Chesapeake & N. Ry. v. Speakman (Ky.)


Annulment of, HUSBAND 2. The time and amount of the payments to be made by a stockholder on a

WIFE, I. stock subscription payable in instalments MASTER AND SERVANT. having been determined absolutely by stat

Estoppel to Plead Statute of Limitaute, the payments become due at the times


LIMITATION Acprescribed, and the statute of limitations

TIONS, 1. begins to run against their collection as

Liability of Street Commissioner for as default occurs. West v. Topeka

Injury to Servant, see HIGHWAYS, Sav. Bank (Kan.)


4-6. 3. When a private corporation becomes Rights and relation generally. insolvent and suspends active business, or

1. A man has, under the constitutional when it closes its doors and ceases all its right of acquiring property, the unrestricted usual and ordinary business, leaving debts right to work for such employer as he unpaid, the statute of limitations begins to chooses for such wages as he chooses to acrun at once on a stockholder's subscription cept, and other persons cannot interfere to its capital stock, to be paid at intervals with this right by intimidating either him upon the call of the board of directors, and or his employers. Erdman

Mitchell then subject to call, even though no call be (Pa.)

534 made.


2. The right of railroad companies to 4. So long as a private corporation is a discharge employees does not imply the solvent and going concern, the statute of right to be guilty of a violent or malicious limitations does not begin to run act which results in injury to the disstockholder's subscription to its capital charged employee's calling. Hundley 1. stock, to be paid at intervals upon the call | Louisville & N. R. Co. (Ky.)

289 of the board of directors, until a call has 3. A custom of railroads to keep a recbeen made.

Id. ord of the causes of the discharge of emNOTES AND BRIEFS.

ployees, and to decline to employ those

who are discharged for certain causes, Limitation of actions; effcct, on opera- makes it a part of the contract of employ; tion of statute, of delay of party in taking ment that no false entry as to the cause of action incumbent upon him; when limita such discharge shall be made, or communition begins to run as to stockholder's lia-cated, if made, to any other railroad combility; in case of insolvency of corporation.


Id. 138

4. Averments that plaintiff has been de Estoppel to plead defense of.


prived, by blacklisting, of the right to enLimitation of time for bringing action for gage in railroad employment, and that the negligent death; acknowledgment of tort wrong has made it impossible for him ever and promise to make amends as suspending to get such employment, are mere concluoperation of statute; estoppel of one who sions, and insufficient to state a cause of acinduces another to refrain from bringing tion, without averring that he has sought suit until after bar of statute, to rely on employment and been refused by reason of statute. 193'the wrong.





5. An agreement between railroad com- was tending when she was injured, in stoppanies not to employ persons discharged by ping and starting which she moved the the respective companies gives employees greasy handle of a lever from a point 8 no right of action unless carried out. Id. inches from the exposed cogs to a point Duty and liability of master.

5 or 6 inches from them, and then back 6. A master is not bound to have present again, the cogs, though covered when she at every moment a representative at the commenced work, having been uncovered for place where work is being performed, to six weeks before the accident, to her knowlkeep safe the position which an employee edge,-assumed the risk of the exposed mamay chance to occupy as against possible chinery, the defect of the exposed gearing negligence of coemployees. Southern Indi-being obvious and the danger apparent. Id. ana R. Co. v. Harrell (Ind.)

460 15. Where the uncontradicted evidence

discloses the fact that the defect in the Assumption of risks.

7. Assumption of risk and contributory place or machinery by which a servant negligence are distinct and separate de

was injured was obvious, and the danger fenses; the former resting in contract, the from it apparent to an ordinarily prudent latter in tort. St. Louis Cordage Co. v.

person of the intelligence and capacity of Miller (C. C. A. 8th C.)


the servant, and that the servant entered 8. The defense of assumption of risk is upon or continued in the service without not conditioned or limited by the existence of risk is conclusively established, and the

complaint of it, the defense of assumption of contributory negligence, and the latter is court should instruct the jury to return not an element or attribute of it.

a verdict for the master.

Id. 9. A servant, by entering or continuing Fellow servants and their negligence. in the employment of a master without com

16. A servant assumes the risk of injury plaint, assumes the risks and dangers of the from the negligence of fellow servants who employment which

knows and appreci- have been selected with due care on the ates, and those which an ordinarily prudent part of the master. Southern Indiana R. Co. and careful person of his capacity and in

v. Harrell (Ind.)

460 telligence would know and appreciate in his situation.


17. A master is not liable for injury to

an employee from the fact that a derrick 10. An employee cannot be heard to say erected for the purpose of constructing a that he did not appreciate or realize the stone pier under a railroad bridge inclined danger, where the defects were obvious and

so as to swing the stones towards the track, the dangers would have been apparent to an where the injury was caused by the negliordinarily prudent person of his intelligence gent breach, by employees, of a custom never and experience in his situation.


to attempt to handle stones when a train 11. A servant, by continuing in the em- was passing, in consequence of which a susployment without complaint, assumes the pended stone struck a moving train, and risks of the defects and dangers which arise was forced against an employee to his induring the service, to the same extent that jury.

Id. he assumes those which exist when he enters

18. A statute making the master liable the employment.


for injuries received by an employee while 12. Among the risks and dangers which obeying the order or direction of a vice prina servant assumes by entering or continuing cipal does not apply to orders which are in the employment without notifying his as broad as the whole service, so that at master of them are those which arise from the time of the injury the person injured the failure of the master to completely dis- was governing himself according to his own charge his duty to exercise ordinary care judgment as to what was proper. Id. to furnish the servant with a reasonably safe place to work and reasonably safe appliances gang does not represent the master in

19. A foreman of a bridge construction to use.


directing, at a time when a train is passing, 13. The Missouri factory act, which re- the raising, by a derrick so constructed as quires gearing and belting to be guarded, to swing toward the track, of a stone to be does not abolish the defense of assumption placed in a pier of a railroad bridge, the of risk of exposed gearing.

Id. effect of which is that the stone swings 14. A young woman twenty years of age against the train, and is forced against an who was injured by slipping her fingers into employee to his injury.

Id. the mashing cogs of gearing in a factory Liability of master to third persons. where she had worked more than six months, 20. Authority given to a servant emand where she had been frequently called ployed as night watchman to arrest tres. upon to operate, for ten or fifteen minutes passers includes authority to take the prisat a time, the forming machine which she oner to the town calaboose, and there confine


him until he can be turned over to the gence of railroad servants in charge of sig. proper officers.

Southern R. Co. v. James nals, telegraph offices, locomotives, etc. 461 (Ga.)


Elements of authority and control as 21. Where a servant does an act in the foundation of responsibility for negligent execution of a lawful authority given him act; when work is being done for benefit by his master, and for the purpose of per- of master so as to render him liable; duty forming what the master has directed, the to furnish safe appliances; liability of street master will be liable for an injury thereby commissioner for injury to person employed inflicted on another, whether the wrong be by him.

223 occasioned by negligence, or by a wanton Liability for negligence of independent and reckless purpose to accomplish the contractor.

546 master's business in an unlawful manner.


MAXIMS. 22. A servant who shoots at a trespasser 1. Causa proxima non remota spectatur. as he is running away, after having broken Delaney v. Modern Acci. Club (Iowa) 603; away from the servant, who has arrested Cole v. German Sav. & L. Soc. (C. C. A. 8th him, and is taking him to the town cala-C.) 416; Snyder v. Philadelphia Co. (W. boose, acts within the scope of his employ- Va.)

896 ment so as to render the master liable for

2. Damnum absque injuria. Cole v. Geran injury thereby inflicted, where he is em

man Sav. & L. Soc. (C. C. A. 8th C.) 416; ployed as night watchman, with authority Snyder v. Philadelphia Co. (W. Va.) 896 to arrest all persons trespassing upon the premises.

3. Equitas sequitur legem. Hall v. Henderson (Ala.)

673 23. A lot owner cannot relieve himself from liability for injury to an adjoining

4. Qui facit per alium facit per se. Davis v. Summerfield (N. C.).

492 building through the negligent excavation of his own lot by letting the work to an in

5. Reddendo singula singulis. Allison v. dependent contractor, if, by reason of the Allison (Va.)

920 depth to which the excavation is to be 6. Respondeat superior. Spangler v. St. carried, it might reasonably be anticipated Joseph & G. I. R. Co. (Kan.)

634 that injury would probably occur from the 7. Salus populi suprema est lex. Walprosecution of the work unless reasonable lace v. Reno (Nev.)

337 care was exercised. Davis v. Summerfield

8. Ubi jus, ibi remedium. Hundley F. (N. C.)

Louisville & N. R. Co. (Ky.)


9. Volenti non fit injuria. St. Louis Master and servant; right of servants to Cordage Co. v. Miller (C. Č. A. 8th C.)

551 quit work; injunction to restrain them

NOTES AND BRIEFS. from quitting.

Res ipsa loquitur.

219, 285 Blacklisting employees :-(I.) Introductory; (II.) right of employers to combine MEANDER LINE. for blacklisting purposes; (III.) right of See BOUNDARIES. corporation to circulate a blacklist among its own agents or employees; (IV.) effect MEDICAL ATTENDANCE. of malice; (V.) legislation; (VI.) sum- Statute Requiring Furnishing of Medimary


cal Attendance to Minors, see INAssumption by servant of risk of obvious

FANTS, 2-5. defect; failure to protest as evidence of; necessity of appreciation of danger. 553 MENTAL SCIENCE. Applicability of employers' liability act

Denial of Charter to Society Promul. to railroad in process of construction; limi

gating Method of Treating Disease tation of, to specific persons, acts, etc.,

by Prayer, see CORPORATIONS, I. enumerated therein; what risks assumed by

MILLS. servant; liability for injury by fellow servant; foreman as fellow servant with those

Power of Legislature to Authorize Con

demnation of Private Property for working under him; servant choosing dan

Purpose of Erection of, see Emi. gerous place to work where safe place pro

NENT DOMAIN, 7. vided; effect of employers' liability acts on fellow-servant doctrine and assumption of

NOTES AND BRIEFS. test as to whether act causing injury Mills; constitutionality of mill acts prowas one of superintendence; what consti- viding for condemnation of property for tutes vice principalship; liability for negli- 'public mills.



« PreviousContinue »