Page images
PDF
EPUB

and labor required for that purpose; and that C. did not and could not
know, from the appearance or from examination of the staging, whether it
was or was not strong enough for his workmen to go upon to paint the church.
There was no evidence that the defendants took any part in erecting the
staging, or in directing its erection, beyond making the contract with D.;
or that they at any time made any inspection of the staging; or that they
were guilty of any negligence in employing D. to erect it. Held, that the
society, through its authorized agents, had accepted and used the staging,
and had in effect invited and induced C. and his workmen to come upon it
to paint the church, and was liable to the plaintiff for an injury from the
dangerous condition of the staging which was not apparent to him and
which was caused by negligence in its construction. Held, also, that the
society and its agents could not be sued jointly in this action. Mulchey v.
Methodist Religious Society, 487.

After judgment for the conversion of certain chattels, an action cannot be
maintained for the conversion of other chattels taken by the same act, al-
though the plaintiff was prevented from including them in the former action
by the fraudulent acts of the defendant. McCaffrey v. Carter, 330.

5. If a person falls from a platform twenty feet to the ground, becomes un-
conscious on striking the ground, and remains so until his death, damages
cannot, in an action against the person who was bound to keep the platform
in repair, and through whose neglect in so doing the accident happened, be
recovered for the mental or other suffering endured during the fall. Ken-
nedy v. Standard Sugar Refinery, 90.

6. An action for personal injuries caused by falling a distance of forty feet,
and resulting in instant death on reaching the ground, cannot be maintained.
Moran v. Hollings, 93.

7. An action of tort in the nature of deceit cannot be maintained against an
officer, who, at a sale of land on execution, in good faith makes a statement,
as of his own knowledge, that the land is free from incumbrances, when it
is in fact incumbered. Tucker v. White, 344.

8. A grantee cannot maintain an action of contract upon an oral statement
made by his grantor, before delivery of the deed, that the land is free from
incumbrances. Ib.

9. An agreement to forbear, for a certain time, to enforce the performance of
a contract complete in itself cannot be pleaded in bar to an action upon the
contract. Rodocanachi v. Buttrick, 134.

See ASSESSOR; Bankrupt, 3; Bond, 3; Conflict of Laws, 2; Contract,
3, 5; CORPORATION, 2; EQUITY, 10; INTEREST; JOINT DEBTOR; Plead-
ING, 2; PROMISSORY NOTE, 1, 3, 4; RAILROAD, 1, 7; Ship, 2; Sur-
VEYOR OF HIGHWAYS, 1; TRUST AND TRUSTEE, 1.

ADMINISTRATOR.

See EXECUTOR AND ADMINISTRATOR.

ADMISSION.

See EVIDENCE, 14.

ADULTERATION.

See INDICTMENT, 1.

ADULTERY.

See EVIDENCE, 16.

AGENT.

See PRINCIPAL AND AGENT.

AGREEMENT.

See CONTRact.

ALABAMA CLAIMS.

See BANKRUPT, 4, 6; INSOLVENT DEBTOR.

ALIEN.

See PAUPER, 1.

ALTERATION OF INSTRUMENTS.
See PROMISSORY NOTE, 1, 2.

AMENDMENT.

See PARTNERSHIP; PRINCIPAL AND SURETY, 1; Trust and TrusteR, 1
TRUSTEE PROCESS.

ANSWER.

See PLEADING, III

APPEAL.

An appeal from the judgment of a magistrate upon charges of fraud under
the Gen. Sts. c. 124, §§ 31-34, against a person applying to take the oath
for the relief of poor debtors, by which the debtor is adjudged guilty of
some of the specifications in the charges and not guilty of others, vacates
the whole judgment, and opens the case for trial upon all the charges, al
though the other party does not appeal. Morse v. Dayton, 47.

See EQUITY, 11; INTERROGATORIES, 2; NUISAnce, 1.

APPRAISER.

See EXECUTION.

AQUEDUCT.

See DAMAGES, 3.

ARRAIGNMENT.

See CONVICTION.

ARREST.

See ACTION, 1; OFFICER, 1, 2.

ASSAULT AND BATTERY.

An indictment charging that A. "in and upon one B., with a certain danger-
ous weapon, to wit, with a pistol then and there loaded with powder and a
leaden ball, with which dangerous weapon the said A. was then and there
armed, feloniously, wilfully and of his malice aforethought did make an as-
sault, with intent the said B. then and there, with the pistol aforesaid, felo-
niously, wilfully and of his malice aforethought to kill and murder," suffi-
ciently sets forth an assault with a dangerous weapon; and is sustained by
proof of an assault by shooting with the pistol. Commonwealth v. Fenno,

387.

See OFFICER, 1.

ASSESSMENT.

See SEWER, 2.

ASSESSOR.

Assessors are liable, in an action of tort, for assessing and issuing a warrant
for the collection of a school-district tax, if the school district was not le-
gally established, although it was certified to them, by one acting as clerk
of the district, that the tax had been voted by the district. Judd v. Thomp-
son, 553.

ASSIGNEE IN BANKRUPTCY.
See BANKRUPt, 1, 3, 4, 6.

ASSIGNMENT.

1. Future wages, to be earned under an engagement not existing at the time,
are not capable of being assigned. Herbert v. Bronson, 475.

2. In an action on an account annexed for work and labor, brought in the
name of A. for the benefit of C., there was evidence that A., who was in the
employ of B. by the day, assigned to C. all claims against B. for money due
and to become due "for services rendered and to be rendered" for a certain
time; that the consideration of this assignment was goods already furnished
and to be furnished by C. to A.; that, before the time limited by the assign-
ment expired, A. left the employ of B., and entered the employ of D., under
an arrangement by which A. was to continue to work on B.'s premises at
the same wages, to be paid by B. to D., and by the latter to A., partly in
cash and partly in goods. Held, that A.'s employment by B. being by the
day, he had the right at any time to find employment elsewhere; and that
none of A.'s wages, after he ceased to work for B., passed by the assign

ment to C. although the arrangement between A., B. and D. was made with
the intent to terminate the employment of A. by B., and deprive C. of the
benefit of the assignment. Lightbody v. Smith, 51.

See BANKRUPT, 4, 5;

EQUITY, 6; LEASE, 1, 2; OFFICER, 3.

ASSUMPSIT.

See CONTRAct.

ATTACHMENT.

See BOND, 3; Contract, 4, 5; EQUITY, 3, 7; Judgment, 2, 3; Officer, 8'
PARTNERSHIP; PRINCIPAL AND SURETY; TRUST AND TRUSTEE, 5, 6.

ATTORNEY AND COUNSEL.

See INTERROGATORIES, 1; PAYMENT, 3.

AUDITOR.

It is no ground of objection to the report of an auditor, that, for the purpose
of determining the issues submitted to him, he construes a contract, the
construction of which is involved in such determination. Coker v. Ropes,

577.

See STATUTE.

BAILMENT.

See CARRIER; EVIDENCE, 9.

BANK.

1. A national bank which purchases a promissory note from an indorsee may
maintain an action thereon in its own name against a prior party thereto,
without regard to the question whether the purchase was one which it was
authorized by law to make. National Pemberton Bank v. Porter, 333.

2. In an action for money had and received, to which the answer was a gen-
eral denial, it appeared that the defendants, a firm of brokers, sent to the
plaintiff, a national bank, certain promissory notes, ordered by its president
and a director, for the amount of which its cashier returned a check to
them; and the question was whether the plaintiff purchased the notes or
had the option to buy them or not, as its board of directors should decide.
The directors refused to purchase the notes. The defendants offered to
prove that national banks bought commercial paper, which their presidents
were authorized by usage to purchase, and requested the judge to rule that,
even if the plaintiff had such option, the action of its cashier completed
the sale. The judge rejected the evidence, refused so to rule, and, by con-
sent of parties, before verdict, reported the case to this court, upon an
agreement that if the plaintiff could not lawfully buy the notes and the
evidence was rightly rejected and the rulings refused, a verdict should be
entered for the plaintiff. Held, that the question whether a national bank
had authority to purchase promissory notes did not arise in the case; ano

that the question as to the contract between the parties was for the jury
Attleborough National Bank v. Rogers, 339.

BANKRUPT.

1. An assignee in bankruptcy has no better title than the bankrupt, except in
goods conveyed in fraud of creditors. Dugan v. Nichols, 43.

2. Under the U. S. Rev. Sts. § 5013, the four months next preceding the com-
mencement of proceedings in bankruptcy, an attachment made within which
is dissolved by § 5044, are to be reckoned exclusive of the first day, and, if
the last day falls on Sunday, exclusive of that also. Cooley v. Cook, 406.
3. An assignee in bankruptcy, after demand and refusal, may maintain an
action of tort, in the nature of trover, against an officer holding goods of
the bankrupt under an attachment on mesne process which has been dis-
solved by the assignment in bankruptcy, without first applying to the court
from which the process issued for an order to deliver the goods to him. Ib.
4. Money paid by the United States, according to a decision of the Court of
Commissioners of Alabama Claims, under the U. S. St. of June 23, 1874, to
the owner of a cargo destroyed by one of the insurgent cruisers, with
respect to which it was determined by the Tribunal of Arbitration at
Geneva, constituted by virtue of the Treaty of Washington of 1871, that
Great Britain had failed to fulfil her duties as a neutral government, belongs
to an assignee of such owner, appointed under the bankrupt act of 1867,
after the destruction of the property and before the making of the treaty;
and may be recovered from the owner by the assignee in an action for
money had and received. Leonard v. Nye, 455.

5. The U. S. St. of February 26, 1853, requiring assignments of any claim
upon the United States to be executed in the presence of two witnesses,
and after the allowance of the claim, the ascertainment of the amount due,
and the issue of a warrant for its payment, applies only to voluntary assign-
ments in pais, and not to assignments by operation of law in bankruptcy
proceedings. Ib.

6. A sale by an assignee in bankruptcy, under order of the court, of “certain
choses in action, consisting of certain bills, notes and accounts, nominally
of the value of about $1000, but in reality nearly worthless," does not
include the right of the assignee in money afterwards awarded to the bank-
rupt by the Court of Commissioners of Alabama Claims for the previous
destruction of his property by an insurgent cruiser. lb.

7. Under the U. S. St. of June 22, 1874, § 12, knowledge on the part of a pur-
chaser, that the sale was in fraud of the seller's other creditors, is neces-
sary to set aside the sale as to him. Lincoln v. Wilbur, 249.

8. On the issue whether a sale made by a person within four months of his
bankruptcy was in fraud of his creditors, evidence of what he said, after
the sale, and without the knowledge of the purchaser, as to the disposition
of his property, and mortgages subsequently made by him, not shown to be
connected with such sale or parts of a general scheme to defraud, are inad
missible, as against the purchaser. Ib.

« PreviousContinue »