« AnteriorContinuar »
ance," $ 2.
On judgment, see "Judgment,” $ 4.
COLLATERAL INHERITANCE TAX.
See "Taxation," $ 1
The lien of a chattel mortgage covering cer-
ing collisions in general.
*A collision in Hell Gate between an ocean
steamer and a car float on the side of a tug
held due solely to the fault of the tug in fail-
ing to carry out an agreement to pass to the
right.-The Werdenfels (D. C.) 400; The Trans-
fer No. 11, Id.
*A steamer held solely in fault for a colli-
sion in Norfolk Harbor with a crossing launch
which was on her starboard side, for violation
of articles 19, 22, and 23 of the navigation
rules for rivers and harbors (30 Stat. 96 et
seq. [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 2883]). The
Pocomoke (D. C.) 193.
§ 3. Vessels at rest, at anchor, or at
*A moving vessel which comes into collision
with a vessel moored is presumptively in fault,
and she cannot be exonerated from liability on
the ground that she was at the time being hand-
led by tugs which controlled her movements,
unless such defense is pleaded and proved. The
Degama (C. C. A.) 323; James Gibboney &
Co. v. Bridges, Id.
$ 4. Lights, signals, and lookouts.
*A small launch 61 feet long held not char-
not special lookout.-The Pocomoke (D. C.) 193.
*A burden vessel which was guilty of a
clear violation of the rules of navigation which
in itself was sufficient to account for a colli-
sion cannot escape liability therefor by merely
raising a doubt as to the proper navigation of
relied on should be covered by the pleadings,
and cannot be put forward for the first time
in argument after the case has been tried and
closed on other issues.-The Werdenfels (D. C.)
*Libelant held not entitled to recover an al-
leged depreciation in the market value of its
vessel resulting from collision.-The Loch Trool
(D. C.) 429.
*Libelant held not entitled to recover for loss of the use of a vessel while undergoing repairs
CONCLUSION. made necessary by collision.-The Loch Trool Of witness, see "Evidence," $ 3. (D. C.) 429.
In insurance policies, see "Insurance," $$ 2, 3.
CONFLICT OF LAWS.
Assignment of accounts, see "Assignments,"
$ 1. See “Conspiracy.”
Life insurance contract, see "Insurance," § 1. COMMERCE.
CONFUSION OF GOODS. Carriage of goods and passengers, see "Car- *Where a wrongdoer knowingly mingles the riers"; "Shipping."
property of another with his own in such man§ 1. Power to regulate in general.
ner that it becomes un'distinguishable, the owner *The right of a state to regulate the business may follow the property or its proceeds for of common carriers within its boundaries so the property of which he had been dispossessed.
the purpose of fastening an equitable lien for far as that business affects the public is found---Smith v. Township of Au Gres, Michigan (C. ed on the state's right to protect its commerce. C. A.) 257. --Platt v. Le Cocg (C. C.) 391. § 2. Subjects of regulation.
CONNECTING CARRIERS. When a corporation engages in interstate commerce, it subjects itself to the regulative See "Carriers," 2. provisions concerning such commerce constitutionally prescribed by Congress.-Cassatt Mitchell Coal & Coke Co. (C. C. A.) 32; Same
CONSIDERATION. v. Webster Coal & Coke Co. c. c. A.) 48; Of contract in general, see "Contracts,” § 1. Same v. Pennsylvania Coal & Coke Co., Id. COMMISSIONERS.
CONSOLIDATION. Regulation of carriers by railroad commission of railroads, see "Railroads,” g 1. ers, see “Carriers," $ 1.
Injunction to restrain conspiracy to injure busiSee “Carriers."
ness, see “Injunction," $S 1, 3.
§ 1. Civil liability, COMMUNITY PROPERTY.
*A conspiracy to do an act may be unlawful,
although the act, if done by a single person, See “Husband and Wife," $ 1.
would be lawful.-Allis-Chalmers Co. v. Iron
Molders' Union No. 125 (C. C.) 155.
*An association of retail dealers held entitled
to refuse to purchase from wholesalers selling to Of agent, see “Principal and Agent," $ 1. catalogue or mail-order houses, and inform each Of trustee in bankruptcy, see "Bankruptcy,” other as to what wholesalers did so sell.-Mont§ 8.
gomery Ward & Co. v. South Dakota Retail Salvage, see "Salvage," § 1.
Merchants' & Hardware Dealers' Ass'n (C. C.)
*That a combination of retail dealers in mer
chandise interfered with complainant's right to Of witnesses in general, see "Witnesses," § 1. buy goods by persuasion or peaceable means ex
erted against the sellers did not constitute unCOMPETITION.
fair competition, intimidation, or coercion.
Montgomery Ward & Co. v. South Dakota ReUnfair competition, see “Trade-Marks and tail Merchants' & Hardware Dealers' Ass'n (C. Trade-Names," $ 2.
*The right to do business free from interferCOMPLAINT.
ence, except from lawful competition, includes
the right to buy as well as to sell.-Montgomery In criminal prosecution, see "Indictment and Ward & Co. v. South Dakota Retail Merchants' Information."
& Hardware Dealers' Ass'n (C. C.) 413. *Point annotated. See syllabus.
§ 2. Criminal responsibility.
Contracts relating to particular subjects.
roads," § 1.
es," $ 1.
“Sales"; "Vendor and Purchaser."
Leases, see "Landlord and Tenant."
any contract of the vendor induced thereby void-
able at his election, and vests in him a right to
recover of any of the conspirators the value of
all the benefits he has received thereunder.-
criminal prosecution, see "Indictment and 8 2. Construction and operation.
In an action for services under a contract of
pliedly undertook to use reasonable care and dili-
er.-Mathieson Alkali Works v. Mathieson (C.
dering it necessary to resort to extrinsic evi-
Laughlin Steel Co. v. Monongahela & Western
Dredging Co. (C. C. A.) 298.
*A creditor who sues on a contract made by
pay the debt does so subject to all the equities
existing between the original parties to the con-
tract.-Fish v. First Nat. Bank (C. C. A.) 524.
A provision of a mortgage construed, and
over the mortgage by the holder of a mechanic's
lien subsequently acquired against the mortga-
gor, and which, under the law of the state, was
subject to the mortgage.-Old Colony Trust Co.
claim against estate of bankrupt, see “Bank- $ 3. Performance or breach.
In an action for services in the installation
that the plant installed by him was not obsolete,
plants operated by other manufacturers.-Mathi-
ing," § 1.
Where plaintiff was employed as a consulting
manager of defendant's alkali works, he was.
not responsible for purchasing certain machin-
ery connected therewith in England at a higher
price than equally efficient American machinery
Works v. Mathieson (C. C. A.) 241.
evidence held to require a finding that the negli-
gent construction of the rear wall, and an in- $ 1. Incorporation and organization. excusable delay in completing the building by *A corporation is not a natural person, but the principal in the bond, was the indirect cause a creature of the state, possessing no powers of the building's collapse-Wing & Bostwick Co. except those conferred by the state.-Cassatt v. v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. (C. Mitchell Coal & Coke Co. (C. C. A.) 32; Same C.) 672.
1. Webster Coal & Coke Co. (C. C. A.) 18;
Same v. Pennsylvania Coal & Coke Co., Id. $ 4. Actions for breach.
In an action on a contract for services, evi- *An agreement entered into in contemplation dence as to why a proposed deal for the consoli- of incorporation, and followed by incorporation, dation of another company with defendant's is binding upon the parties, and will be enforced company was not completed held properly ex- in its entirety where all the terms of the concluded, as involving a collateral issue. -Mathie tract except one have been executed, and such son Alkali Works v. Mathieson (C. C. A.) 241. term failed of execution solely through fraud,
In an action on a contract for services in mistake, or inadvertence of the parties. Cook v. the installation of an alkali plant, etc., an in- | Sterling Electric Co. (C. C. A.) 766. struction authorizing an allowance for damages $ 2. Corporate powers and liabilities. occasioned by improper or negligent construc- *In an action against a corporation on a contion, etc., held proper. -Mathieson Alkali Works tract, an allegation of the contract which was v. Mathiesonic. C. A.) 241.
set out in the declaration verbatim held to suffi
ciently charge that defendant was incorporated CONTRADICTION.
under the laws of Virginia.-Mathieson Alkali
Works V. Mathieson (C. C. A.) 241. Of witness, see “Witnesses," $ 3.
An allegation that a defendant was a corpo
ration under the laws of the state of Virginia, CONTRIBUTORY INFRINGEMENT.
was a citizen of Virginia, etc., held equivalent to an allegation that defendant was created by
or organized or existing under the laws of that Of patent, see "Patents," $ 4.
state.-Mathieson Alkali Works V. Mathieson
(C. C. A.) 241. CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE.
§ 3. Foreign corporations. Of person injured by operation of railroad, see A foreign corporation which complied with the "Street Railroads," $ 1.
requirement of the New York statute to entitle it to do business in that state, but subsequently
ceased such business and withdrew from the CONVEYANCES.
state, revoking the appointment of its agent for
service therein, held not subject to suit therein Particular classes of conveyances.
by service on the Secretary of State, which is See "Assignments"; "Chattel Mortgages"; authorized by section 16 of the general corpora"Mortgages."
tion law (Laws 1892, p. 1806, c. 687), in case
of the death or removal of such agent of a COPYRIGHTS.
foreign corporation doing business in the state. -Lathrop-Shea & Henwood Co. v. Interior
Const, & Imp. Co. (C. C.) 666. § 1. Infringement.
*A preliminary injunction to restrain the production of a copyrighted opera denied on the
CORRECTION. showing made.-G. Ricordi & Co. v. Hammerstein (C. C.) 450.
Of record on appeal or writ of error, see "Ap
peal and Error," $ 4. CORPORATIONS.
COSTS. Amendment of pleading in action on corporate contract, see "Pleading," $ 2.
Dismissal of petition in involuntary bankAppearance by, see "Appearance."
ruptcy, see "Bankruptcy," $ 2. Citizenship of, for purpose of removal of cause
to federal court, see “Removal of Causes.' $ 1. Nature, grounds, and extent of § 2.
right in general. Reformation of corporate contracts, see "Ref- *Where the defendants in a suit for specific ormation of Instruments," $ 1.
performance failed to insist on a defense of adeRegulations of interstate commerce, see "Com- quate remedy at law until after a large mass merce," 2.
of testimony had been taken, they should have Particular classes of corporations.
been taxed with a part of the costs on the sus
taining of such defense.-Marthinson v. King See "Municipal Corporations”; “Railroads"; (C. C. A.) 48.
"Religious Societies"; "Street Railroads." Insurance companies, see "Insurance."
See "Municipal Corporations."
residents of the district as defendants, under
Act Cong. March 3, 1875, c. 137, 18 Stat. 470,
24 Stat. 552, and corrected by Act Aug. 13, 1888,
p. 508], and Act 1875, 88 5, 8.-Miller v. Ahrens
*The failure of an amended bill filed in a
that is dependent on diversity of citizenship.-
In insurance policies, see "Insurance," $ 3.
See "Husband and Wife.”
Against bankrupt laws, see "Bankruptcy," $ 11.
a prosecution for violating the internal
er evidence sufficient to connect him with the
*A letter written wholly on a typewriter,
such accused as a communication
purporting to have come from him, unless shown
*Point annotated. See syllabus.