Grantee entitled to a way "to the west end"
of granted premises held entitled to way en-
abling him to pass upon that end.-Morton v.
Thompson (Vt.) 88.
Grant of easement with defeasance clause
held to entitle heirs and assigns of grantor to
defeat the easement, though not named in the
clause.-Morton v. Thompson (Vt.) 88.
Occupant of premises held entitled to ease-
ment, though not in privity with the orig-
inal grantee.-Morton v. Thompson (Vt.) 88.
One entitled to way over land held not enti-
tled to exclusive use of it.-Morton v. Thomp-
son (Vt.) 88.
Of passenger, see "Carriers."
In ejectment to recover possession and rent
of premises leased to defendant, plaintiff must
prove that defendant was in possession when
suit was brought.-Sowles v. Carr (Vt.) 77.
In ejectment to recover possession and rent
of premises leased to defendant, when it is
shown that defendant was in possession when
suit was brought, if defendant relies on a sur-
render, he must prove it.-Sowles v. Carr (Vt.)
77.
After plaintiff has recovered on his legal title,
defendant cannot sue in equity for the value
of improvements made while in possession.-
Fricke v. Safe-Deposit & Trust Co. (Pa.) 601.
Evidence held to justify directing verdict for
plaintiff.-Williams v. Milligan (Pa.) 1015.
Of widow under will, see "Wills."
Under Burlington City Charter, held that an
alderman, to be eligible, must be a legal voter of
the ward for which he is elected.-State v. Mc-
Geary (Vt.) 165.
Under Burlington City Charter, held that one
who owned a house in a ward, and was prepared
to move into it, was not a resident of that ward,
where he had not given up his dwelling in an-
other.-State v. McGeary (Vt.) 165.
The fact that officers empowered to hold a
special election were not sworn does not invali-
date the result, if neither fraud nor harm be
shown.-Smith v. Howell (N. J. Sup.) 180.
Indictment charging embezzlement of certain
money held to sufficiently show the value thereof.
-State v. Barr (N. J. Sup.) 817.
Indictment for embezzlement of certain mon-
ey held to sufficiently specify the money embez-
zled.-State v. Barr (N. J. Sup.) 817.
Where an employé of an individual embezzles
his money, he embezzles the money of his em-
ployer, within Crimes Act, § 161.-State v.
Barr (N. J. Sup.) 817.
EMINENT DOMAIN.
tional burden on the soil of a common highway.
An electric street railway held not an addi-
-Philadelphia, W. & B. R. Co. v. Wilmington
City Ry. Co, (Del. Ch.) 1067.
Compensation for laying out a highway across
railroad determined.-Paterson, N. & N. Y. R.
Co. v. City of Newark (N. J. Sup.) 689.
Laying out of a highway across a railroad is
a taking of the company's property for public
use.-Paterson, N. & N. Y. R. Co. v. City of
Newark (N. J. Sup.) 689.
An action on the case against lessees for
leased property burned through their negligence
held consistent with an action therefor on their Of taxes, see "Taxation."
agreement to return the property in good con-
dition.-Priest v. Foster (Vt.) 78.
By presenting claim against insolvent estate of
defaulting tax collector, and obtaining dividend
thereon, a town does not waive its right to pur-
sue sureties on his official bond.-Town of Paw-
let v. Kelley (Vt.) 92.
In a recount of ballois the board of election
should count as many ballots as there are names
of apparent voters on the poll book.-Lippincott
v. Felton (N. J. Sup.) 821.
On a partial recount of ballots, the justice
ordering the same should make a certificate as
to the whole number of votes for each person
for the office, as shown by the original certificate
of the canvassers corrected by the recount.-
Lippincott v. Felton (N. J. Sup.) 821.
Mandamus lies to compel supervisors of elec-
tion to place the name of a nominee for office on
the ballot, when a vacancy in the office is to be
filled.-Wells v. Munroe (Md.) 987.
The house of delegates has authority to decide
on the election and qualifications of candidates
for office and order new elections in case of va-
cancy.-Wells v. Munroe (Md.) 987.
One who votes for an ineligible candidate must
be clearly shown to have purposely done so be-
fore the vote can be thrown aside in determining
whether the opposing candidate received a ma-
jority of votes cast.-State v. McGeary (Vt.) 165.
Performance of the condition of a bond for ti-
tle by the obligee before a levy of an execution
is no defense in an action at law by a grantee of
the execution creditor.-Marston v. Osgood (N.
H.) 378.
See, also, "Charities"; "Injunction"; "Marshal-
ing Assets and Securities"; "Mortgages";
"Partition"; "Partnership": "Receivers":
"Specific Performance"; "Trusts."
Equity has jurisdiction of an action compel-
ling an agent to account.-Yeaney v. Keck (Pa.)
1041.
In order to avoid a multiplicity of suits, an an-
swer in a suit in equity may, by consent, be con-
sidered as a cross bill.-Gray v. Taylor (N. J.
Ch.) 951.
Where objection to jurisdiction is not taken.
before answer, the suit will be entertained, unless
there are no facts giving jurisdiction.-People's
Nat. Bank v. Loeffert (Pa.) 996.
Under 2 Gen. St. p. 1273, § 1, a court of chan-
cery has jurisdiction of a suit by a wife for
separate maintenance, where the domicile of both
parties is in the state, and defendant is tem-
porarily absent.-Hervey v. Hervey (N. J. Ch.)
767.
In bill to enjoin obstruction of a way, held that
defendant could amend cross bill to show that
during the hearing he had tendered orator a deed
of another sufficient way in lieu of the one he
was obstructing.-Morton v. Thompson (Vt.) 88.
Where plaintiff's stock stands in defendant's
name, the latter may be compelled to make such
assignment as may be necessary for plaintiff's
beneficial use.-Scott v. Scott (N. H.) 567.
Application for an accounting by the committee
of a lunatic 14 years after the death of the lu-
natic, who died one year before the committee,
denied for laches.-Commonwealth v. Stewart
(Pa.) 597.
Twelve years' delay held to constitute laches
barring bill to have a constructive trust declared.
-Wiggin v. Swamscot Mach. Co. (N. H.) 727.
Where an answer to a bill contains a demurrer,
as permitted, and, although a replication has been
filed, the case is set down for hearing generally
before the expiration of 60 days, it constitutes a
waiver of the replication, and the case is to be
heard on bill, answer, and demurrer; the answer
to be taken as true.-Ricker v. Portland & R. F.
Ry. (Me.) 338.
that the payee was estopped to refuse to surren-
der the note, on the ground that the stock had
not been given up within said time.-American
Gas & Ventilating Mach. Co. v. Wood (Me.)
548.
Sellers of mortgaged personalty, who covenant
to warrant and defend against every person, held
estopped to enforce the mortgage when subse-
quently assigned to them.-Kane v. Lodor (N.
J. Ch.) 966.
Grantor held estopped by deed to assert that
the grantee had no right of way over adjoining
property of the grantor.-Seibert v. Graff (N. J.
Ch.) 970.
Husband held estopped to set up, as to premises
to which his wife had title through foreclosure of
a mortgage given by him with warranty, a prior
mortgage inherited from her on her death.-Brad-
ford v. Burgess (R. I.) 975.
Where devisees, in order to escape personal
liability for testator's debt, to the amount of con-
sideration received by them on alienation of
lands, surrendered the consideration, held, that
they were estopped to deny that there was a
consideration paid.-Ransom v. Brinkerhoff (N.
J. Ch.) 919.
A bill to rescind a sale for fraud held not de-
murrable because there was an adequate remedy
at law, where the procedure in equity could afford
the complainant more efficient modes of relief. See, also, "Criminal Law"; "Trial"; "Witness-
Morse v. Nicholson (N. J. Ch.) 178.
Equity will not interfere with a lawful litiga-
tion, unless some fraudulent or wrongful use is
made of the proceeding.-McInnes v. McInnes
Brick Manuf'g Co. (N. J. Ch.) 182.
So long as complainant acts in a lawful man-
ner in the assertion of his rights, it is no defense
that he is actuated by evil motives. McInnes v.
McInnes Brick Manuf'g Co. (N. J. Ch.) 182.
Amendment to bill charging fraud on failure of
evidence to establish the same allowed on pay-
ment of costs.-O'Connor v. O'Connor (R. I.)
370.
Where answer is prayed under oath, and de-
fendant denies a material allegation of the bill,
complainant must plead further, or offer proof in
behalf of the allegation.-Neldon v. Roof (N. J.
Ch.) 429.
The court will not refuse to hear a defense
based on an event which happened since the fil-
ing of the bill.-Hall v. Home Building Co. (N.
J. Ch.) 447.
ERROR, WRIT OF.
See "Appeal and Error."
ESTABLISHMENT.
Of boundaries, see "Boundaries."
Of bridges, see "Bridges."
See, also, "Life Estates."
Created by will, see "Wills."
Of decedents, see "Descent and Distribution."
Tenancy in common, see "Tenancy in Common."
An estate in expectancy is not the subject of
a grant. In re Lennig's Estate (Pa.) 466.
By judgment, see "Judgment."
Under a quitclaim deed containing a special
warranty against claims under the grantor, a
subsequently acquired title does not inure to the
grantee.-Bennett v. Davis (Me.) 372.
Where the maker of a note was entitled to its
surrender on giving up certain stock within a
prescribed time, held, under the circumstances,
![[blocks in formation]](https://books.google.am/books/content?id=3ylBzEGVHP8C&hl=hy&output=html_text&pg=PA1123&img=1&zoom=3&q=editions:HARVARD32044103144101&cds=1&sig=ACfU3U2gZcBfATQrASaHzte6doP5XY5BGg&edge=0&edge=stretch&ci=497,677,448,418)
The court will not take judicial notice of pro-
ceedings in a case referred to in the bill unless
they are offered in evidence.-Anderson v. Cecil
(Md.) 1074.
Proceedings to punish for contempt for cer-
tiorari held no part of the certiorari suit, so as
to authorize the court to take notice of the files
without their being put in evidence in a contempt
proceeding.-State v. Hudson County Electric
Co. (N. J. Sup.) 818.
Relevancy and competency in general.
Evidence in relation to matters with which the
adverse party is entirely unconnected is proper-
ly excluded.-State Bank of City of New York
V. Waterhouse (Conn.) 904.
Jocular statements held not admissible in evi-
dence as res gestæ. - Holmes v. Washington
Real-Estate Co. (R. I.) 946.
Evidence of the conduct of horses in general
in the presence of moving trains is admissible to
show how a particular horse would act in a
similar situation.-Folsom v. Concord & M. R.
R. (N. H.) 209.
In a suit against a city for damages caused by
defects in a sewer, the testimony of a physician
as to other sickness in the neighborhood held
inadmissible.-Willett v. Village of St. Albans
(Vt.) 72.
Evidence of what plaintiff "understood" held
admissible in explanation of his acts.-Bertoli
v. Smith (Vt.) 76.
Certain evidence held admissible in proof of
age.-Parkhurst v. Krellinger (Vt.) 67.
Letters and declarations of a judge out of court
are inadmissible to show why he made a decree.
-Appeal of Allen (Conn.) 701.
Demonstrative evidence.
Signatures having no date were properly used
as standards of comparison, where it does not
appear that there was nothing to show when they
were written.-Redding v. Redding's Estate (Vt.)
230.
Signatures of the maker executed two years
prior to execution of the notes in suit held admis-
sible as standards of comparison, though the
maker's handwriting had materially changed in
the meantime. - Redding v. Redding's Estate
(Vt.) 230.
Writings of the maker of a note, though not
signed, may be used as standards of comparison,
where it is contended that the bodies of the notes
were written by him.-Redding v. Redding's Es-
tate (Vt.) 230.
Declarations and admissions.
Declaration of husband held admissible against
his wife in a contest for property between the
wife and the husband's creditors.-Poundstone
v. Jones (Pa.) 714.
Declarations of person as to his symptoms,
made to a physician, leading him to form an
opinion to which he may testify as a witness,
are inadmissible.-Lambertson v. Consolidated
Traction Co. (N. J. Err. & App.) 683.
Declarations of agent held admissible only
when the existence of the agency has been estab-
lished.-Bennett v. Talbot (Me.) 112.
Declarations of a grantor that he had not made
payments called for by his deed, and the fact
of his poverty, held admissible to show that the
payments had not been made.-Oakman v. Wal-
ker (Vt.) 63.
Declarations of a grantor held admissible for
the purpose of showing full consideration.-Oak-
man v. Walker (Vt.) 63.
Declaration as to past transactions held inad-
missible against another, though at the time
they were conspirators to defraud creditors.-
Smith v. Brockett (Conn.) 57.
Declarations of conductor of a train as to how
a person was injured, made two months after the
accident, held inadmissible.-Nebonne v. Con-
cord R. R. (N. H.) 17.
Failure to reply to letter not sent in course of
correspondence is not an admission of the truth
of its contents.-Hand v. Howell (N. J. Sup.)
748.
Admission as to the condition of a person in-
jured a month after the accident held admissible
as the description of a fact.-Baltimore City
Pass. Ry. Co. v. Nugent (Md.) 779.
Printed copies of the constitution of a beneficial
order in the hands of the secretary of the grand
lodge, sent for his guidance by the secretary of
the supreme lodge of the world, are presumed to
be genuine and accurate.-Schubert Lodge, No.
118, Knights of Pythias of New Jersey, v. Schu-
bert Kranken Unterstuetzungs-Verein (N. J. Ch.)
347.
Bible held insufficient to show age where en-
tries are not shown to have been contemporane-
ous with the facts stated.-Supreme Council of
Golden Star Fraternity v. Conklin (N. J. Err. &
App.) 659.
Where defendant refused to produce vouchers
as required by order, held, that he could not aft-
erwards use them as evidence, in view of Com-
mon Law Practice Act, § 157.-Flemming v.
Lawless (N. J. Ch.) 864.
Parol evidence held not admissible to show the
intention of parties to a contract during the
negotiations. In re Haynes' Estate (Vt.) 240.
On the question of the recognition by a land-
lord of his tenant, as such, after the expiration
of the lease, parol evidence is admissible.-Ams-
den v. Atwood (Vt.) 263.
The statement that witness thought there was
a bill of sale held not sufficient proof of a written
instrument to sustain an objection to oral proof
of a transfer.-Hadden v. Linville (Md.) 37.
Where a contract is clear, evidence as to the
understanding of the parties held inadmissible.
-Borley v. McDonald (Vt.) 60.
Parol evidence held admissible to show that
notes given on the delivery of cattle were not
given for the price.-Schaeffer v. Sensenig (Pa.)
Where a tax was assessed to "Samuel J.
missible to show that the assessment was meant
Bridge, Estate of," parol evidence was not ad-
to apply to the executor of decedent's will, so as
to render him personally liable to the tax.-In-
habitants of Dresden v. Bridge (Me.) 545.
Where written contract transferring title to
corporate bonds showed intention to pass title to
coupons, evidence as to secret intention of trans-
ferror held inadmissible.-Fox v. Hartford & W.
H. H. R. Co. (Conn.) 871.
Parol evidence held admissible to show modi-
fication of lease.-Crawford v. Bellevue & G.
Natural Gas Co. (Pa.) 595.
In an action for personal injuries a witness,
not an expert. can state that a month after the
injury the plaintiff looked very bad, and was
lame; such evidence not being opinion evidence,
but the description of a fact.-Baltimore City
Pass. Ry. Co. v. Nugent (Md.) 779.
Conduct of horses in the presence of moving
trains is a proper subject for opinion evidence.-
Folsom v. Concord & M. R. R. (N. H.) 209.
The opinion of one acquainted with the hand-
writing of another is admissible to prove that
such person executed the note sued upon.-Red-
Evidence held not admissible as hearsay.- ding v. Redding's Estate (Vt.) 230.
Hadden v. Linville (Md.) 37.
Documentary evidence.
A certified copy of proceedings on a voluntary
petition in insolvency on the court docket held
admissible to show that such proceedings had
been had.-Smith v. Brockett (Conn.) 57.
Copy of record of a cross-examination in in-
solvency in another state held properly excluded
where it has no certificate from the judge of the
insolvent court.-Smith v. Brockett (Conn.) 57.
The record of a court of insolvency in another
state held admissible for purposes of identifica-
tion.-Smith v. Brockett (Conn.) 57.
When one is deemed acquainted with the hand-
writing of another, so as to be able to testify
to the same.-Redding v. Redding's Estate (Vt.)
230.
to hold up an elevator gate might be fastened,
An expert may be asked how the dog used
so that there would be no danger of its moving
except in the natural or intended way.-Sawyer
v. J. M. Arnold Shoe Co. (Me.) 333.
man, alleged expert testimony that the accounts
In assumpsit to recover for services as sales-
between the parties were in the form of partner-
ship accounts was inadmissible. - Ryder v. Ja-
cobs (Pa.) 471.
The opinion of a physician formed on declara- |
tions of an injured person as to his symptoms are
admissible where there is evidence of the truth
of the declarations. - Lambertson v. Consoli-
dated Traction Co. (N. J. Err. & App.) 683.
Of witnesses in general, see "Witnesses."
Reservation in lower court, see "Appeal and
Error": "Criminal Law."
To pleading, see "Pleading."
EXCEPTIONS, BILL OF.
See "Appeal and Error."
der the provisions of the will, held, that the court
of chancery would not then give them directions
as to the continuance of the business.-Tierney
v. Tierney (N. J. Ch.) 971.
An administrator pendente lite held to have
power to discharge the debts of the decedent.-
Baldwin v. Mitchell (Md.) 775.
In the absence of fraud, an executor's sale to
the life tenants under the will was refused to be
set aside on application of remainder-men, made
many years after the sale.-In re Markle's Es-
tate (Pa.) 612; Appeal of Barber, Id.
Where testator gave lands in trust for his
sons and daughters, with remainder to their chil-
dren, and a trustee petitioned for the sale of
the property to the sons and daughters, held, that
their minor children were in fact and in law par-
ties to the proceeding, though no citation to
them was issued.-In re Markle's Estate (Pa.)
612; Appeal of Barber, Id.
Where the court directed the executor to trans-
fer property to a beneficiary under the will, and
such beneficiary assigned his interest for value
to a third person, held, that the decree authoriz-
ing the sale should not be so modified, as against
the assignee, as to provide that any deficit in the
Regulation of traffic in intoxicating liquors, see price should stand as a lien against the proper-
"Intoxicating Liquors."
A right to occupy stalls in a city market sold
by the city under the statute is subject to lien.-
Green v. Western Nat. Bank (Md.) 131.
Lien of execution held not defeated by existence
of mortgage, where title is in the mortgagee, with
only equity of redemption in the judgment debtor.
-Green v. Western Nat. Bank (Md.) 131.
A creditor's subsequent conveyance, with war-
ranty, of property acquired by levy, is sufficient
evidence of his acceptance of seisin.-Marston v.
Osgood (N. H.) 378.
The sale of life estates under execution, with-
out an order of the court allowing the writ, as
provided by the act of 1849, and without notice,
is void.-Kunselman v. Stine (Pa.) 414.
Mere inadequacy of price is no ground for
setting aside a sale by sheriff.-Carson v. Am-
brose (Pa.) 508.
Sale for $400 of property worth $2,500 set
aside where it was erroneously supposed to be
subject to a mortgage of $2,000.-Stroup v. Ray-
mond (Pa.) 626; Appeal of Crow, Id.
An agreement by a portion of creditors to
buy the debtor's logs at sheriff's sale, for the
general benefit, held not fraudulent so as to in-
validate the sale.-Braden v. First Nat. Bank
(Pa.) 1023.
A receiver appointed in supplementary pro-
ceedings is not entitled to recover a debt due to
ceedings is not entitled to recover a debt due to
the judgment debtor, which was not in existence
at the time of the appointment.-Guild v. Meyer
(N. J. Ch.) 959.
EXECUTORS AND ADMINISTRATORS.
See, also, "Wills."
Courts of probate, see "Courts."
Effect of administration on limitation, see "Lim-
itation of Actions."
Liability for tax on property of estate, see
"Taxation."
Right of appeal, see "Appeal and Error."
Testamentary trustees, see "Trusts."
Testimony as to transactions with decedents,
see "Witnesses."
An administrator de bonis non defined.-Hodge
v. Hodge (Me.) 535.
Where executors for three years after testa-
tor's death continued a mercantile business un-
ty. In re Markle's Estate (Pa.) 620; Appeal of
Hessenbruch, Id.
Where deceased held land for himself and in
trust for others, and his executors sold it under
a power, held, that the cestuis que trustent
should have a voice in the matter of the time of
enforcing the mortgage.-Arkenburgh v. Lake-
side Residence Ass'n (N. J. Ch.) 297.
A mortgage by executor to secure a debt bar-
red by limitations, though binding on adult
heirs consenting thereto, held void as to minor
heirs.-Hemphill v. Pry (Pa.) 1020.
Where a trustee converts the fund, and after-
wards dies, the beneficiary has no better stand-
ing than other creditors, unless he can identify
the fund.-Hodge v. Hodge (Me.) 535.
Appointment.
Where there is a dispute between heirs as to
the alleged assets of an estate, and an unfriend-
ly feeling existed, letters should be issued to a
stranger.-In re Schmidt's Estate (Pa.) 464; Ap-
peal of Becker, Id.
judgment of testator against him.-Anderson v.
Appointment of executor does not discharge a
Anderson (Pa.) 1007.
granted are revoked, the executor has no right
Where letters of administration improperly
to interfere with the granting of letters to the
next of kin.-In re Neidig's Estate (Pa.) 1033;
next of kin.-In re Neidig's Estate (Pa.) 1033;
Appeal of Rupley, Id.
Probate court, in revoking on appeal letters
improvidently issued, held authorized to order
that letters be issued by the register to the nom-
inee of the next of kin. In re Neidig's Estate
(Pa.) 1033; Appeal of Rupley, Id.
Petition to revoke letters testamentary as im-
Neidig's Estate (Pa.) 1033; Appeal of Rupley,
Id.
properly granted held wrongfully refused. In re
Allowances to widow.
An allowance to a widow for support pending
settlement of estate may be made concurrent
with receipt of income by her.-Appeal of Ha-
vens (Conn.) 795.
An order for allowance for widow during set-
tlement of estate implies a finding of necessity
thereof. Appeal of Havens (Conn.) 795.
month for the support of a widow held not lim-
An order that a certain sum be allowed per
ited to one year, notwithstanding an order lim-
iting 12 months for settlement of the estate.-
Appeal of Havens (Conn.) 795.
Residuary legatee, entitled in equity to have
payments made under order of the court by
executors to widow for support set off against
a claim for interest on the trust fund under the
will, cannot obtain such relief of the probate
court.-Appeal of Havens (Conn.) 795.
Allowance and payment of claims.
Rev. St. c. 87, § 19, authorizing the supreme
court sitting in equity to give judgment for
the amount of a claim against a decedent's es-
tate, when limitations have expired, if justice
requires it, etc., does not create a cause of ac-
tion in equity after the bar of the statute, where
there was none at law before.-Hodge v. Hodge
(Me.) 535.
Lien of defendants held lost by statutory limita
tion, where tae will did not create an express
trust for their payment.-In re Mitchell's Estate
(Pa.) 489.
ty by him, though decedent had never lived in
such county, and left no estate therein.-Appeal
of Ela (N. H.) 501.
Whether a debt is due from an administrator
to the estate, and the amount of it, are questions
primarily of probate jurisdiction, subject to ap-
peal to the supreme court.-Hodge v. Hodge
(Me.) 535.
Executors accepting office with knowledge of
provisions in will as to their compensation are
bound thereby.-In re Hays' Estate (Pa.) 622.
From service of process, see "Process."
taxation, see "Taxation."
A claim by remainder-men against life tenant's In civil actions, see "Evidence."
estate for dissipating goods, it being impossible
to follow the specific articles, must be proved as a
claim against an estate, and share pro rata with
other creditors.-Quicksall v. Chew (N. J. Ch.)
442.
Evidence to establish claims for services not
made during decedent's lifetime held insufficient.
-In re Weaver's Estate (Pa.) 12; Appeal of
Paul. Id.
A mortgage creditor of deceased, who proved
his claim against the estate for the entire amount,
averring that he held no security, waived his
security.-Nickerson v. Chase (Me.) 175.
There is no authority for appointment of com-
missioners of an insolvent estate after 30 days
from the expiration of period for presentation
of claims.-Strong v. Luther (R. I.) 1054.
The supreme court, under Pub. St. c. 221, § 8,
can grant a trial in a case in which a party had
neglected to prosecute his appeal from the judg-
ment of commissioners on an insolvent estate.
Baker v. Hoxie (R. I.) 1000.
A suit against an executrix, in her private ca-
pacity, for property which she claims as lega-
tee of her testator, held not barred by Pub. St.
c. 191, § 4.—Perkins v. Perkins (N. H.) 1049..
Under Pub. St. c. 191, § 6, a suit brought by
an administrator within two years after ap-
pointment is not barred by Pub. St. c. 191, § 4.
-Perkins v. Perkins (N. H.) 1049.
Where administrator of life tenant had sold
corporate stock standing in name of intestate's
testator, held, that the corporation and vendee of
the stock were necessary parties to a bill to com-
pel the administrator to deliver the proceeds to
the remainder-men, the sale being unauthorized.
-Quicksall v. Chew (N. J. Ch.) 442.
FALSE IMPRISONMENT.
The note in the suit in which plaintiff was ar-
McMullin v. Erwin (Vt.) 62.
rested held admissible under the general issue.
Evidence that defendant thought the original
suit had been properly brought held immateral.-
McMullin v. Erwin (Vt.) 62.
An attorney giving a capias writ to an officer
to serve held not liable for the tort of the offi-
cer in altering the writ.-McMullin v. Erwin
(Vt.) 62.
FALSE PRETENSES.
Where defendant is prosecuted for obtaining
money from complainant by falsely pretending
that he had, as her attorney, commenced a suit
and expended certain money, defendant cannot
show that complainant knew the suit she em-
ployed him to prosecute was for a fictitious
claim.-Cunningham v. State (N. J. Sup.) 847.
In a prosecution for obtaining a certain amount
under false pretenses, the prosecution may show
that defendant procured several sums of money
at different times, and need not show that he
obtained the exact amount charged.—Cunning-
ham v. State (N. J. Sup.) 847.
Of attorney for assignee, see "Assignments for
Benefit of Creditors."
Of clerks of courts, see "Clerks of Courts."
On foreclosure, see "Mortgages."
FELLOW SERVANTS.
An administrator de bonis non cannot sue the
estate of his predecessor for money wrongfully
received by the latter prior to his appointment
as administrator, unless such money is distin- See "Master and Servant."
guishable as a part of intestate's property.-
Hodge v. Hodge (Me.) 535.
Accounting and settlement.
Rehearing allowed executor after decision on
exceptions to his account.-In re Kalbfell's Es-
tate (Pa.) 1007.
When an accounting to date cannot be had in
the chancery court in a bill by executors for the
construction of the will.-Tierney v. Tierney (N.
J. Ch.) 971.
An administrator cannot set up the invalidity
of a decree under which he holds property as de-
fense to an accounting therefor.-Appeal of Ela
(N. H.) 501.
The division of a fence on a boundary line
by proceeding under 2 Gen. St. p. 1461, does
not change the ownership of the materials in the
existing fence.-Titman v. Smith (N. J. Sup.)
810.
Power of township committee in proceedings
to divide a partition fence in awarding dam-
ages to be paid in money by either owner in or-
der to equalize the division.-Titman v. Smith
(N. J. Sup.) 810.
In the exercise of its common-law jurisdiction,
the probate court could charge an administrator Chattel mortgage, see "Chattel Mortgages."
with property of the estate brought into the coun- Record on appeal, see "Appeal and Error."
|