monthly payments, until May 1, 1881, when the defendant refused to
allow him to do so any longer. In an action for damages, held, that the
defendant was not bound to permit him to continue the advertisements for
the rest of the year 1881, and that the action was not maintainable. Chase
v. Second Avenue Railroad Company (97 N. Y. 384), 531.
5. Public policy - unlicensed broker.] An unlicensed real estate agent,
subject to penalty for doing business without a license, cannot recover
compensation under contract for such business. Johnson v. Hulings (103
Penn. St. 498), 131.
6. Restraint of trade.] On the sale of a stock of goods and a lease, the seller
engaged not to re-engage in that business for five years. Held, void.
Wiley v. Baumgardner (97 Ind. 66), 427.
Bee CORPORATION, 212; DAMAGES, 246; GUARDIAN, 78; INSURANCE; LICENSE,
152; LANDLORD AND TENANT, 161; MASTER AND SERVANT, 770; MUNI-
CIPAL CORPORATION, 113; STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS, 844; WILL, 326.
CONTRACTOR.
See MASTER AND SERVANT.
DECLARATIONS.
See EVIDENCE.
See BOUNDARY, 311, 609; MARRIAGE, 88, 116
Bee LANDLORD AND TENANT, 777.
See MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, 118.
See NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT, 1, 525.
CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE.
See NEGLIGENCE, 37, 622.
ultra vires.] A contract by a corporation organized to build a
public bridge, with the proprietor of a newspaper, to give him stock of
the company in consideration of his publishing articles favoring the en-
terprise and showing the value of it as an investment, is valid. Liebke
v. Knapp (79 Mo. 22), 212.
2. Malicious prosecution.] An action for malicious prosecution may lie
against a corporation. Jordan v. Alabama Great Southern Railroad Com-
pany (74 Ala. 85), 800.
3. Right to vote by proxy.] Unless the right is conferred by charter or by-
laws, members of a corporation may not vote by proxy. Commonwealth
v. Bringhurst (103 Penn. St. 134), 119. ·
4. Title to stolen stock certificates.] A bona fide purchaser of certificates of
stock standing on the company's books in the name of the former owner,
regularly indorsed by him, and stolen from the present owner without his
fault, gets no title. Barstow v. Savage Mining Company (64 Cal. 388), 705.
See OFFICER, 107.
CRIMINAL LAW.
1. Appeal by escaped prisoner.] The appeal of an escaped prisoner will be
dismissed. Warwick v. State (73 Ala. 486), 59.
2. Disorderly house — requisites of indictment.] In an indictment for keep-
ing a disorderly house it is unnecessary to allege the character of the per-
sons frequenting it. State v. Dame (60 N. H. 479), 331.
3. Evidence-testimony of co-defendant.] Where by statute an indicted
person may testify on his own behalf on the trial of the indictment, one
of two jointly indicted may testify against his co-defendant on his sepa-
rate trial, although the indictment against himself is still pending and
he has pleaded not guilty. State v. Barrows (76 Me. 401), 629.
4. Former acquittal — adultery.] On a prosecution for adultery the former
acquittal of the co-defendant cannot be pleaded in bar. Alonzo v. State
(15 Tex. Ct. App. 378), 207.
6. Libel — mitigation.] On a criminal prosecution for libel the defendant
may show in mitigation that the libel was provoked by a libel upon him
Hartford v. State (96 Ind. 461), 185.
by the prosecuting witness.
6. Lost indictment.] When an indictment is lost after plea the trial may pro-
ceed on a copy. Schultz v. State (15 Tex. Ct. App. 258), 194.
-] A lost indictment may be supplied by a copy, upon affidavits, inde-
pendent of the recollection of the judge. It seems, the case is covered by
the Code. State v. Gardner (13 Lea, 134), 660.
8. Murder - evidence -- clothes of deceased.] On a trial for murder by
shooting, the clothes worn by the deceased, with the shot holes in them,
may be exhibited to the jury in evidence. Hart v. State (16 Tex. Ct. App.
202), 188.
jurisdiction - United States fort.] Where a mortal wound is
unlawfully inflicted in a fort of the United States, and the victim dies
out of the fort, the State courts have no jurisdiction, although the State
statute should profess to give jurisdiction. State v. Kelly (76 Me. 331), 620.
10. Twice in jeopardy — repeal of statute.] The prisoner having been in-
dicted for murder, the statute was so amended as to render it illegal to
convict him of murder, and without any saving clause, but not so as to
affect the crime of manslaughter. He was then tried and convicted of
murder. Held, that he might be subsequently tried under the same in-
dictment for manslaughter. Garvey's Case (7 Colo. 384), 358.
CUSTOM.
See CARRIER, 54.
DAMAGES.
1. Exemplary-tort punishable as a crime.] In a cívil action for a tort
punishable as a crime exemplary damages may not be awarded. Murphy
v. Hobbs (7 Colo. 541), 366.
2. Measure-breach of contract to convey land.] If a vendor sells land
with warranty of title, and at the time the land has been rented by his
agent, without his direction or knowledge, and the vendee is thereby
delayed in getting possession, the measure of damages is the fair rental
value for the lost time, and prima facie the rent agreed to be paid by the
tenant is the fair rental value. Moreland v. Metz (24 W. Va. 119), 246.
3. Proximate cause.] The defendant left a train of cars standing entirely
across a highway crossing near its station, and the plaintiff, desiring to
reach the station, undertook to drive with a horse and cart at a point
where there was no crossing and the track was raised above the ground,
and he was thrown off by the jostling of the cart and injured. Held, that
the injury was not the proximate result of the defendant's conduct. Jack-
son v. Nashville, Chattanooga and St. Louis Railway (13 Lea, 491), 663.
--] Where one is injured by the negligence of another, and the injury
renders the system more susceptible to disease and less able to resist it,
and death results from such disease, the death is legally attributable to
such negligence. Terre Haute and Indianapolis Railroad Company v.
Buck (96 Ind. 346), 168.
DECLARATIONS.
See EVIDENCE, 615.
L. Acknowledgment — curing defect.] A notary public having made and de-
livered a defective certificate of acknowledgment of a deed cannot amend
it in the absence of the grantor. Enterprise Transit Company v. Sheedy
(103 Penn. St. 492), 130.
2 Consideration—illicit intercourse.] A deed executed and delivered in
consideration of future illicit intercourse, the grantees being in possession,
vests title. Hill v. Freeman (73 Ala. 200), 48.
DISORDERLY HOUSE.
See CRIMINAL LAW, 331.
Bee LANDLORD AND TENANT, 277.
Prescription-floatage-injunction-parties.] The defendant, claiming a
prescriptive right in the public, proposed to float logs down a private stream
running across the plaintiff's land, whenever he chose. The act would do
some injury to the banks and other lands of the plaintiff. In thirty years
the stream had been so used by not more than twelve persons, and by not
more than three or four in any year, and for not more than from three to
six days in any year. Held (1), that no prescription was established; (2),
that all parties asserting the right might be joined as defendants; (3), that
an action lay to restrain the defendants and settle the plaintiff's rights.
Meyer v. Phillips (97 N. Y. 485), 538.
See VENDOR AND PURCHASER, 679.
Voters — residence — student.] Although the Constitution provides that the
residence of a student at any seminary of learning shall not entitle him to
the right of suffrage in the town where such seminary is situated, yet he
may gain the right to vote there if he intends to make that place his per-
manent abode, independent of his sojourn as a student. Sanders v. Get-
chell (76 Me. 158), 606.
EMANCIPATION.
See INFANCY, 567.
Telegraph poles on highway.] The legislature may authorize the erection of
a telegraph line on a highway without compensation to the owners of the
fee. Pierce v. Drew (136 Mass. 75), 7.
See EVIDENCE, 508; MARRIAGE, 83.
Right of finder to use.] Estrays may not be used by the finder unless it is
necessary for their preservation, and for the benefit of the owner.
▼. Hartman (7 Colo. 13), 339.
1. Estoppel by omission to answer letter.] A letter written by one party to
a transaction to the other party, after the transaction, giving his version
of it, and not answered by the other party, is not competent in evidence
against the latter as an admission. Leonard v. Tillotson (97 N. Y. 1.),
2. Expert — time to burn fallow.] The proper time to burn a fallow is not a
question of expert evidence. Ferguson v. Hubbell (97 N. Y. 507), 544.
weight of.] In an ordinary case it is error to instruct the jury that
expert medical testimony should be received and weighed with caution.
Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railroad Company v. Thul (32 Kans.
255), 484.
4. Joint assault-conspiracy.] In an action against several for a joint assault,
evidence of prior and subsequent misconduct on the part of some of the
defendants, tending to show a conspiracy, implicates only those commit-
ting such acts. Strout v. Packard (76 Me. 148), 601.
6. Judicial notice.] Where every locality of two hundred inhabitants may
incorporate itself as a town, the courts will not take judicial notice of
such incorporation. Temple v. State (15 Tex. Ct. App. 304), 200.
6.] Courts will not take judicial notice of the rule for the measurement
of corn in the shock, nor that a railroad car of given dimensions cannot
contain three hundred bushels thereof. South and North Alabama Rail-
road Company v. Wood (74 Ala. 449), 819.
7. Nuisance-fright of horses.] In an action for a personal injury by the
fright of a horse by the escape of steam from the defendant's mill, situ-
ated on the edge of a highway, evidence that other safe horses had been
frightened by it is admissible. Crocker v. McGregor (76 Me. 282), 611.
8. Partnership-firm books.] To prove a partnership the partnership-
books alone are not competent evidence, but in connection with evidence
tending to prove the partnership and access to and knowledge of the
books, are competent. Bryce v. Joynt (63 Cal. 375), 94.
9. Parol-to explain ambiguity.] A legacy being provided for "the Bible
Society," parol evidence is competent to show what society was meant,
and evidence that an annual contribution was taken for one of them in
the testator's church is competent. Tilton v. American Bible Society (60
N. H. 377), 321.
10. Pedigree — declarations.] To prove the illegitimacy of a claimant of an
intestate estate, the declarations of the intestate's deceased sister, in
whose family the claimant was born and brought up and intestate lived,
are admissible, when made ante litem motam. Northrop v. Hale (76 Me.
306), 615.
See CRIMINAL LAW, 188, 629; INFANCY, 567; MORTGAGE, 437; NEGOTIABLE,
INSTRUMENT, 1; PARTNERSHIP, 522; TRIAL, 724; WITNESS,
Levy on replevied chattel.] A replevied chattel in possession of the sheriff
is not liable to execution against the same defendant in another action.
First National Bank of Oswego v. Dunn (97 N. Y. 149), 517.
See INJUNCTION, 731; PLEDGE, 592.
|