« PreviousContinue »
formations for quo warranto; 1 of proceedings for contempt; 2
; ments which enter into the construction subject. Grusenmeyer v. Logansport, of the laws which govern it, and are 76 Ind. 549. matters of which the courts will take Judges of the Courts. - Plaintiffs
judicial notice. Stout v. Board of obtained a change of venue in this Commrs., 107 Ind. 343.
the district court of A complaint to forfeit the franchises Boone county
Boone county to the district court of a gravel road company must state of Story county, both counties bewhen or under what law the corpora- ing in the same judicial district. Aftion was organized, as the court cannot terwards, and after there had been judicially know, nor can it be presumed, a change of the district judge of that a private corporation was organ- that district, defendants moved for ized under a general law. Crawfords- another change, on the ground of the ville Turnpike Company v. Fletcher, prejudice of the judge, but they made 104 Ind. 97.
no showing that the ground on which Notice to Take Depositions.—The su- they asked the change did not exist preme court takes judicial knowledge when the first change was obtained as that a notice at Fort Wayne, served required by section 2951 of the Iowa December 20th to take depositions at code. But, held, that no such showing Topeka, Kansas, on the 26th of the was necessary in this case, because, on same month gives sufficient time. Fitz- account of the change of the judges, patrick v. Papa, 89 Ind. 17.
the alleged prejudice could not have An indictment signed by a “special existed when the first change was obprosecuting" attorney is not subject to tained, and the district court, and this a motion to quash, or to a plea in abate- court as well, will take judicial notice ment which does not deny the due ap- as to who are the judges of the various pointment of such special prosecuting courts of the State and of their terms attorney; the court taking judicial cog- of office. Upton z'. Paxton, 72 Iowa nizance of its officers and their signa- 295. tures and official designations. Choen Reversal of Former Judgment.—The v. State, 8; Ind. 209.
judgment appealed from in this case was Where the word "clerk” is added to based on a prior adjudication between the signature attached to the jurat of an the same parties which was pleaded affidavit in a criminal prosecution it and introduced in evidence while yet will be held to be the signature of the the right to appeal from the former clerk of that court, as the court will judgment existed, but before it had notice who are its own officers. Mount- been exercised. After the judgment joy v. State, 78 Ind. 172; Hipes v. herein had been rendered, an appeal State, 73 Ind. 39.
was taken from the first judgment and Habitual Intoxication.—The supreme that judgment was reversed in this court will take judicial knowledge that court on the merits before the appeal habitual intoxication incapacitates an in this case was decided, but after it administrator for the proper discharge was submitted. It thus appears to the of the duties of his trust. Gurley v. court that, while the judgment in this Butler, 83 Ind. 501.
case could not have been otherwise 1. An information of quo warranto, when it was rendered, it was nevertheunder the third clause of section 1131, less erroneous, because based on the Indiana, R. S. 1881, is sufficient if it former erroncous judgment. Held, that appear therefrom that the defendants the judgment on this appeal should be pretend to be organized as a corpora- reversed, and that in reversing it the tion, and are exercising corporate pow- court does not exceed its constitutional ers, when they are not so organized as jurisdiction. In such case this court the law requires. State cx rel. v. Beck, will take judicial notice of its own
records, and of the fact that the former Action of Board of Commissioners.- adjudication has been reversed; and the An appeal lies from an order of the fact that the record submitted on the board of county commissioners dis- appeal of this case contained no evimissing a petition for the incorporation dence of the reversal of the former of a town; but, on the hearing of such adjudication is immaterial. Poole 2. petition, the board cannot take judicial Seney, 7o Iowa 275. cognizance of its own orders of judg- 2. Former Orders--Contempt.-In a ment in a different case on the same proceeding for contempt, the court will
81 Ind. 500.
the terms of courts; 1 of the statutory qualifications for a par
take judicial notice of its own orders were for the benefit of the city schools in the matter out of which the contempt of Frankfort, and provide that the grant grew. Jordan 7'. Circuit Court, 69 shall determine so soon as there is Iowa 177
raised by lottery $100,000 whether that Records in a Distinct Case-Opinion.— sum has been raised, and therefore Where it appeared that the opinion of whether the privileges are still in exthe supreme court in a different case istence, are facts to be ascertained, and was introduced in evidence on the trial cannot be presumed to be within the in the court below, but was not set out knowledge of the courts. Coinnonin the abstract on appeal, held, that the wealth i'. Bierman, 13 Bush (Ky.) 345. supreme court cannot take judicial 1. Terms of Court.-The court of apnotice in one case of its records in a peals judicially knows that a term of different case. Enix z'. Miller, 54 Iowa the Hardin circuit court intervened be551.
tween the August term, 1874, and the Nor will it take notice of what has August term, 1875. Commonwealth z'. transpired in another case between Pritchett, 11 Bush (Ky.) 281. different parties. Baker z'. Mygatt, 14 Practice.—In some instances courts Iowa 131. And courts do not, in one will judicially notice the practice in recase take judicial notice of the pro- gard to the trial of actions in other ceedings in other cases even though on States. Stout 2'. Ashton, 5 T. B. Mon. their own records. Bond i'. White, 24 (Ky.) 252. Kan. +8.
čitizenship.-Courts may know, juFor the purpose of construing a con- dicially, that the Lexington manustitution or statute courts may take facturing company must exist within judicial knowledge of everything which this State; but cannot know judicially may affect the validity or meaning of that its members are citizens. Lexing. such constitution or statute. Topeka v. ton Mfg. Co. ?'. Dorn, 2 Litt. (Ky.) Gillett, 32 Kan. 131.
257 Municipality.-In a case appealed By requiring the sheriff to execute the from the police judge to the district judgment at the time when he knew the court, the district court should take sale could only be affected for confederjudicial notice of the incorporation of ate money, the plaintiff is presumed to the city, and of the existence and sub- have authorized the receipt of the unstance of its ordinances. Solomon v. lawful currency; hence he cannot reHughes, 24 Kan. 211.
cover from the sheriff the amount bid. Statutes.—It is not proper on the Spaulding & Rogers v. Walden, 23 La. trial of a cause to introduce general An. 475. statutes in evidence, as the court, with- Where a Deposition Belongs.—The suout proof, will take judicial notice of preme court will take judicial notice of the law. Topeka 7'. Tuttle, 5 Kan. 312. the towns composing the different counThe courts will take judicial notice, ties in this State, and the times when without proof, of all the laws of the and the places where its sessions are State, and in doing so will take judicial appointed by law to be held; and where a notice of what the books of published deposition was taken within any county laws contain, of what the legislative in the State, which, by its caption, is rejournals contain, and indeed of every- turnable before this court at a time and thing that is allowed to affect the place appointed by law within such validity or meaning of any law in any county, it will not presume that such respect whatever. Division of Howard deposition is, or may be, returnable beCounty, 15 Kan. 195. .
fore any other court in any other Matters of Law and Fact.—The courts county and State, but
county and State, but the contrary. take notice judicially of matters of law, Kidder z'. Blaisdell
, 45 Me. 461; Martin but not of matters of fact which con- v. Martin, 51 Me. 366. sist wholly in pais. Notice will not be Want of necessary parties will be taken of legislation conferring lottery judicially taken notice of by the courts, privileges, and if these privileges were and ordinarily they will allow an to continue in existence until formally amendment on just terms. Beals i'. revoked; notice may be taken of the Cobb, 51 Me. 348. fact that there had been no legislative Removal of a cloud Upon Title. It is revocation. But where the privileges presumed to be a matter of judicial
ticular office; 1 of bills of exception ; 2 of the
2 of the proper officer to
knowledge that the danger of a cloud Population. — Under the statute of upon title arising from an assessment this State the courts will take judicial which has been held void, is removed notice that the city of Kansas City conby a subsequent statute recognizing the tains more than one hundred thousand invalidity of the assessment and pro- inhabitants according to its last municividing for a reassessment. Byram v. pal census made in pursuance of such Detroit, 50 Mich. 56.
statute and an ordinance thereunder. United States Land Office.-Judicial State ex rel. v. Dolan, 93 Mo. 467. notice may be taken of the general Usages of Banks. -- Judicial notice course of business in the Federal Land must be taken of the ordinary rules and office, in that a purchase commonly pre- necessities of banking business. Amercedes considerably the issuing of a pat- ican Nat. Bank v. Busher, 45 Mich. ent. Fisher v. Hallock, 50 Mich. 463. 135.
Strictly judicial powers can, in Nich- Nonresident Stockholders.--A Michiigan, be vested only in certain courts gan court may well take notice judinamed in the constitution. The circuit cially that the stock holders of the min. courts have such powers; but the ing corporations of the State are nonjudges, out of court and merely as residents and beyond its jurisdiction for judges, cannot exercise them. Toledo rendering personal judgments. Milroy etc. R. Co. v. Dunlap, 47 Mich. 456. V. Spurr Mining Co., 43 Mich. 231.
Policy of the registry laws is a legis- Knowledge of the Professions.--Courts lative and not a judicial question. have judicial knowledge of the general Drake v. McLean, 47 Mich. 102. duties and character of the occupations
Carlisle Tables.-The Carlisle and classed as professions. Pennock . other similar tables, offered for the pur- Fuller, 41 Mich. 153. pose of showing the “expectation” or Filing of Answer.--Judgment by Deprobable duration of life, are to be fault.-Where the object of filing an received (if at all) upon
at all) upon judicial affidavit of default is merely to inform notice of their genuineness and
and the court that no answer has been filed, authoritativeness. No legal proof of of which the court is bound to take genuineness or authoritativeness is judicial notice, it is not error to order a required, but it is proper for the court judgment without the affidavit being to inform itself in the premises by refer- filed. Leonard v. Woodward, 34 Mich. ence to books or other sources of infor- 514. mation. Such tables are not conclusive, Insurance Risks.--Courts will take but their value in a given case is largely judicial cognizance that marine insuranalogical. They must speak for them- ance risks in November are greater selves and not by the mouth of a wit- than those in June. Barry v. Boston ness merely testifying to their contents. Marine Ins. Co., 62 Mich. 424. Scheffler v. Minneapolis etc. R. Co., 32
City Plats and Lands.-The supreme Minn. 518.
court of Michigan has no judicial On a challenge to the panel of petit knowledge of the contents of Detroit jurors the court will take judicial notice plats or the location of Detroit lands, that the county auditor' is ex officio except as identified or affected by legisclerk of the county commissioners. lation or other public action. Cicotte State v. Gut, 13 Minn. 341.
v. Anciaux, 53 Mich. 227. Court House. --The supreme court will Condition of the State.-Courts willtake take judicial notice of the manner in judicial notice of events constituting a which a county court house is con- part of the history of the State and the structed. Golcher u. Brisbin, 20 Minn. condition of things therein in time of 453.
war. Holmes v. Kring, 93 Mo. 452. Former Appeal --An appellate court 2. Bill of Exceptions--Terms of Court. will take judicial notice of its own rec- -This court cannot consider a bill of ord on a former appeal. Dawson v.
v exceptions filed after the lapse of the Dawson, 29 Mo. App. 521.
term at which the motion for a new 1. The statutory qualifications pre- trial was disposed of, unless the record scribed for street commissioner in the shows that the filing was with consent city of St. Louis will be judicially taken of the adverse party. To determine notice of by the courts. St. Louis v. whether it was filed after the term, Greely, 14 Mo. App. 578.
judicial notice will be taken of the
prefer an indictment;1 what is contraband of war;2 irregulari-
notice of a statute authorizing the sale Legal Days.-Courts will take judicial of a railroad, will not take such notice notice of what are and what are not of the fact of sale; nor that the corpolegal days. Schlingmann z'. Fiedler, 3 rate existence of a company, whose Mo. App. 577
charter has not expired by limitation, Constitutional Limits of County.- has ceased, or that the corporation has Courts will take judicial notice not only successors. Shea v. Knoxville etc. R. of the boundaries of counties, but also Co., 6 Baxt. (Tenn.) 277. whether or not an act of the legislature Appointment of Trustee.—The court, cutting off part of the county reduces it while taking judicial notice of the act below its constitutional limits. Woods of 1866, requiring the president and 2. Henry, 55 Mo. 560.
directors of the bank of Tennessee to Date of Decree. Where a motion to execute an assignment of its effects, set aside and modify an order has been could not judicially know that when made at the term at which the order this action was brought in 1866, the assought to be modified was made, but no signment had been made, and one order is inade upon such motion until a Samuel Watson appointed trustee, and subsequent term of the court, the ap- that he had accepted the trust, given pellate court will, although this last bond, and been duly qualified. Topp order does not appear on the record, v. Watson, 12 Heisk. (Tenn.) 411. take judicial notice of the date of the 2. What is contraband of war is a making of such order. Fredericks 2. question of which the court takes Davis, 6 Mont. 460.
judicial knowledge as a question of Adjudication of Insolvency.-The dis- law, and it is error to leave it to the trict court is not bound to take judicial jury as a question of fact. Elrod v. notice of the proceedings of the district Alexander, 4 Heisk. (Tenn.) 342. court of another county; and a disre- Military Occupation; National Jurisgard of an adjudication of insolvency diction in Certain Cases.—The court there made, even if properly proven, will take judicial notice that during the would amount to no more than error. temporary occupation of the adjacent State v. Fifth District Court, 18 Nev. ground used by the United States forces 236.
while preparing cemetery ground, the Judgment Rendered on Election Day.- jurisdiction was exclusive in the United The court will take judicial notice with- States; 'so that the State could not out proof of the fact that a judgment punish a misdemeanor committed appealed from was rendered on election therein during such occupation. Wills day. Rice v. Mead, 22 How. Pr. (N. v. State, 3 Heisk. (Tenn.) 141.
3. Irregularities in Office.-A grant i. Proper Officer to Prefer Indict- of land was delivered to Outlaw, its ments.—The court takes judicial notice owner; the grant was certified upon the of the proper officer to prefer indict- back to have been registered, and it is ments; and when it appears that he in- now to be declared invalid, in the hands tended to sign officially, will disregard of a third person, because it cannot be the omission of any or the adding of an found on record in the secretary's office improper official designation. State z'. of North Carolina. It is known to Mvers, 85 Tenn. 203.
everyone, that, during the time of the Quære, whether this court will reverse late secretary of North Carolina, great for want of proof of the law of a sister irregularities prevailed in that office, State of the existence of which the and the recording of the grant there court is authorized by statute to take might have been omitted. The true judicial cognizance? Sherron v. Hall, question here is, did the State of North 4 Lea (Tenn.) 198.
Carolina execute the grant? It is obOfficers—The Legislature.—This court vious they did, for the court may will take judicial notice of the death of judicially know the seal of that State. one of its clerks and appointment of Ayers v. Stewart, i Over. (Tenn.) 221. another, as well as a change in the A Question of Citizenship. We may time of meeting of the legislature. take judicial notice of the public and Perkins v.Woodfolk, 8 Baxt.(Tenn.,411. notorious acts which constituted a porSale of a Railroad; Corporate Exist- tion of the history of New Mexico dur
the creation of trusts;? the making of a tender in court; 2 the
indictment for feloniously injuring doPueblo Indian Title.—The court will mestic animals it is unnecessary to allege take judicial notice of the history and that a mule is a domestic animal, as the status of the Pueblo Indians, and court will take judicial notice that all of the title by which they hold their mules in the State are domestic anilands. United States v. Lucero, 1 N. mals. State 7'. Gould, 26 W. Va.
258. Money Paid Into Court.-The court Old and New Virginia.--The courts was charged with judicial knowledge of will take judicial notice of the fact that the deposit of money made in court and the northwestern bank of Virginia, was that it was subject to the lien of the at- incorporated by a public act of the tachments. Blum v. Stein, 68 Tex. 608. State of Virginia, prior to the founda
Judgment.-When the proceedings, tion of the State of West Virginia, and including a judgment, are conducted as falls within the provisions of the constipart of the suit against the original de- tution of the latter, saving certain existfendant, against whom judgment has ing laws. N. W. Bank v. Machir, 18 already been rendered, the fact that the W. Va. 271. judgment was against the original de- Signatures of Attorneys.-Courts will fendant need not be proved. The court take judicial notice of the signatures of will take judicial notice of that fact. attorneys practicing therein. StrippelFarrar v. Bates, 55 Tex. 193.
mann i'. Clark, 11 Tex. 296. 1. Identity of a Trust. - Where land History of Laws.--It is the duty of was conveyed to a church elder in trust the court to know and follow the law for his church, and the plaintiff claimed existing in any part of the present limits under a deed from the trustee, and the of the State at the time and under defendant under a deed purporting to be which a title to land was acquired. made by the trustees of the church, State v. Sais, 47 Tex. 309. held, that the recital of the deed that Legal Systems.-And to know that the grantors were trustees of the church the civil code and the code practice of was no evidence of the fact against a Louisiana are the law of that State. party claiming in opposition to the Watrous r. McGrew, 16 Tex. 506.
v deed; and if it was, and there was no Acts of Congress; Treaties.--And to connection shown between the church notice, judicially, acts of congress and and the one for whose benefit the con- public treaties. Jones 2. Laney, 3 Tex. veyance to the elder was made, the 342. court could not judicially know that Bank Charters.--The court mav they were identical, even if the names judicially recognize, or inform itself as were the same. Tapp 7. Corey, 54 Tex. to the charter of the Farmers' Bank of 594
Virginia, or other like banks and as to Special Statute.—The courts will not its organization and acceptance of a take judicial knowledge of the contents provision for the extension of its existof a special act of the legislature provid- ence. Farmers' Bank v. Willis, 7 W'. ing for the issuance to an individual of a Va. 31. land certificate. Tolmes V. Anderson, Interest need not be proved by a 59 Tex. 481.
sworn witness, but the judge or the jury Names of Gambling Games.-Courts may compute it. Joint School Dist. take judicial notice that “rondo” is a No. 1 v. Lyford, 27 Wis. 506. gaming table within the meaning of 2. The court will take notice whether 12 C. of L.-13