Imagens da página


As incumbrance within fire policy, see "Insur-See "Associations."

ance," $ 2.
Effect of proceedings in bankruptcy, see "Bank-
ruptcy," 4.

§ 1. Requisites and validity.

On judgment, see "Judgment,” $ 4.
*Description of certain steers in a chattel
mortgage held insufficient to create a lien there-
on.-Des Moines Nat. Bank v. Council Bluffs

Sav. Bank (C. C. A.) 301.

See "Taxation," $ 1
$ 2. Construction and operation.

The lien of a chattel mortgage covering cer-
tain steers held not to attach to steers not with-

in the description, which afterwards found their
way to the land described in the mortgage, un- See "Guaranty."
der a clause of the mortgage covering after-
acquired or after-located property.-Des Moines

Nat. Bank v. Council Bluffs Sav. Bank (C. C. § 1. Rules and precautions for prevent-
A.) 301.

ing collisions in general.

*A collision in Hell Gate between an ocean

steamer and a car float on the side of a tug
See "Property."

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.
Exclusion or expulsion, see "Aliens," $ 1. § 2. Steam vessels meeting or crossing.

*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
Assignment, see "Assignments."

rules for rivers and harbors (30 Stat. 96 et

seq. [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 2883]). The

Pocomoke (D. C.) 193.
See "Religious Societies."

§ 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
See "Courts," $ 1.

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 &
See "Municipal Corporations."

Co. v. Bridges, Id.

$ 4. Lights, signals, and lookouts.

*A small launch 61 feet long held not char-
geable with fault for a collision because she had

not special lookout.-The Pocomoke (D. C.) 193.
See "Aliens"; "Indians."
Citizenship ground of jurisdiction of United S 5. Suits for damages.
States courts, see "Courts," $ 1; "Removal

*A burden vessel which was guilty of a
of Causes,” 8 2.

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
Against estate of bankrupt, see "Bankruptcy," the privileged vessel.— The Pocomoke (D. C.)

Wining claims, see "Mines and Minerals," $ 1. In a suit for collision, the grounds of fault

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.)
Of dutia ble goods, see "Customs Duties," § 2. 400 ; The Transfer No. 11, Id.

*Libelant held not entitled to recover an al-

leged depreciation in the market value of its

vessel resulting from collision.-The Loch Trool
See “Quieting Title."

(D. C.) 429.
*Point annotated. See syllabus.

*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.
To sustain adverse possession, see "Adverse


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.

C.) 413.

*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.
Under Act Cong. June 14, 1878, 30 Stat. 113, See “Patents," $ 3.
c. 191, $ 2, and Int. Dept. Rules 32, 33, the Traffic contracts between railroads, see "Rail-
failure of a timber culture entryman to make

roads," § 1.
final proof within 13 years from the date of Water supply, see "Waters and Water Cours-
his entry did not of itself invalidate the same
so as to render it incapable of forming the

es," $ 1.
basis of a prosecution for conspiracy to obtain Particular classes of express contracts.
a patent by false and fraudulent proofs.- See "Guaranty"; "Insurance”; “Partnership”;
United States v. Burkett (D. C.) 208.

“Sales"; "Vendor and Purchaser."
*An indictment for conspiracy to defraud Affreightment, see “Shipping,” $ 3.
the United States of certain land held not Agency, see "Principal and Agent."
fatally defective for a lack of certainty - Charter parties, see “Shipping," § 1.
United States y. Burkett (D. C.) 208.

Leases, see "Landlord and Tenant."
*In a prosecution for conspiracy, it is not Suretyship, see “Principal and Surety."
necessary to charge the overt acts done or s 1. Requisites and validity.
necessary to be done to render the object of the *A combination of bidders to suppress com-
conspiracy effective or to charge that the con- petition for the use of surplus moneys of the
spiracy proceeded to a successful determination county is a fraudulent conspiracy in restraint
as designed.—United States v. Burkett (D. C.) of trade, contrary to public policy, and renders

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.-
Necessity of indictment or presentment in In re Blake (C. C. A.) 279.

criminal prosecution, see "Indictment and 8 2. Construction and operation.
Information,” $ 1.

In an action for services under a contract of
Provisions relating to particular subjects, see employment, an instruction that plaintiff im-
Commerce," $ 1; "Religious Societies."

pliedly undertook to use reasonable care and dili-
§ 1. Distribution of governmental pow- gence in the course of his employment held prop-

er.-Mathieson Alkali Works v. Mathieson (C.
ers and functions.
*The Legislature of a state does not look C. A.) 241.
to the state Constitution for power, but only *The construction of a written contract for
to see whether the state supreme legislative will dredging which was ambiguous in respect to the
is restricted by that instrument.-Platt v. Le extent of the work to be done thereunder, ren-
Cocq (C. C.) 391.

dering it necessary to resort to extrinsic evi-
dence, was a question for the jury.-Jones &

Laughlin Steel Co. v. Monongahela & Western

Dredging Co. (C. C. A.) 298.
By trade union, see "Trade Unions."

*A creditor who sues on a contract made by
Violation of injunction, see "Injunction," $ 3. a third person with the debtor to assume and

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.
Amendment of pleading in action on, see heid not to afford basis for a claim of priority

A provision of a mortgage construed, and
"Pleading," $ 2.
Assignment, see “Assignments,"

over the mortgage by the holder of a mechanic's
Cancellation, see

lien subsequently acquired against the mortga-

of Instru-

gor, and which, under the law of the state, was
Damages for breach, see “Damages," § 1.

subject to the mortgage.-Old Colony Trust Co.
Damages for breach of contract as provable v. Standard Beet Sugar Co. (C. C.) 677.

claim against estate of bankrupt, see “Bank- $ 3. Performance or breach.
ruptcy," $ 7.

In an action for services in the installation
Effect on existing contracts of statutory regula- of an alkali plant, plaintiff held entitled to prove
of carriers, see “Carriers," $ 1.

that the plant installed by him was not obsolete,
Impeachment of witness in action on, see “Wit- but was up to date, and as good as similar
nesses," $ 3.

plants operated by other manufacturers.-Mathi-
Operation and effect of gaming laws, see “Gam- eson Alkali Works v. Mathieson (C. C. A.) 241.

ing," § 1.
Parol or extrinsic evidence, see "Evidence,"

Where plaintiff was employed as a consulting
§ 2.

manager of defendant's alkali works, he was.
Reformation, see
"Reformation of Instru-

not responsible for purchasing certain machin-

ery connected therewith in England at a higher
Specific performance, see “Specific Perform- could have been bought.-Mathieson Alkali

price than equally efficient American machinery

Works v. Mathieson (C. C. A.) 241.
Contracts of particular classes of persons. In an action on a building contractor's bond,
See “United States," $ 1.

evidence held to require a finding that the negli-
* Point annotated. See syllabus.

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


§ 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."

Water companies, see "Waters and Water
Courses," $ 1.

See "Municipal Corporations."
*Point annotated. See syllabus.


residents of the district as defendants, under

Act Cong. March 3, 1875, c. 137, 18 Stat. 470,
Jurisdiction of proceedings to limit shipowners' $. 1, as amended by Act March 3, 1887, c. 373,
liability, see "Shipping," $ 4.

24 Stat. 552, and corrected by Act Aug. 13, 1888,
Removal of action from state court to United c. 866, § 1, 25 Stat. 433 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901,
States court, see "Removal of Causes."

p. 508], and Act 1875, 88 5, 8.-Miller v. Ahrens
Review of decisions, see "Appeal and Error." (C. C.) 644.
§ 1. United States courts.

*The failure of an amended bill filed in a
The sufficiency of a bail bond taken from a federal court, to allege the citizenship of the
federal prisoner under Rev. St. § 1014 [U. S. parties at the time the suit was commenced as
Comp. St. 1901, p. 716], is to be determined by well as at the time the amended bill was filed,
the law of the state in which it is taken. -is fatal to the jurisdiction of the court, where
United States v. Zarafonitis (C. C. A.) 97.

that is dependent on diversity of citizenship.-
*The competency of a witness in a federal Cochran v. Pittsburg, S. & N. R. Co. (C. C.)

court under circumstances covered by Rev. St.
$ 858 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 659), is to be

determined by such section, and not by the stat-
utes of the state. -Smith v. Township of Au In charter parties, see “Shipping," $ 1.
Gres, Michigan (C. C. A.) 257.

In insurance policies, see "Insurance," $ 3.
*Upon the question of the care required of a
traveler on a highway on approaching a street
railway crossing the local decisions are per-

suasive in a federal court.-Milford & U. St. Ry.
Co. v. Cline (C. C. A.) 325.

See "Husband and Wife.”
*A bill for an injunction to restrain unlawful
interference with complainant's business held to

contain sufficient averments as to the value of
the right sought to be protected to sustain the Of witness, see "Witnesses,” $ 3.
jurisdiction of a federal court.-Evenson V.
Spaulding (C. C. A.) 517.

*A state statute prohibiting the appointment
of nonresidents of the state as receivers annlies See "Bankruptcy"; "Marshaling Assets and
only to its own courts, and cannot control the Securities."
action of a federal court.-City of Defiance v.
McGonigale (C. C. A.) 689.

*A decision of the Supreme Court of Ohio
in a suit brought under Rev. St. Ohio 1892, $ Bail, see "Bail," $ 1.
1777, denying the right of a city to attack the Indictment, information, or complaint, see "In-
validity of a contract made by it with a water dictment and Information."
company, held controlling in a federal court in
a subsequent action by the water company

Particular offenses.
against the city on the contract, even though See “Conspiracy,” $ 2; “Embezzlement.”
the question of the validity of the contract was Against banking laws, see "Banks and Bank-
not strictly res judicata.-City of Defiance v. ing," § 1.
McGonigale (C. C. A.) 689.

Against bankrupt laws, see "Bankruptcy," $ 11.
A federal Circuit Court, under the judiciary Against postal laws, see “Post Office," $ 1.
act of 1987 (Act March' 3, 1887, c. 373, 27 Fraudulent naturalization, see "Aliens,” s 2.
Stat. 552), as amended by the act of 1888" (Act Receiving rebates from carriers, see "Carriers,"
Aug. 13, 1888, c. 866, 25 Stat. 433 [U. S. Comp.

§ 1.
St. 1901, p. 508]), held to have jurisdiction of a $ 1. Evidence.
suit to compel an interstate carrier to perform

a contract to issue free interstate transportation revenue law, a typewritten letter alleged to have

a prosecution for violating the internal
to complainants, which it refused to do after been dictated by one of the defendants, but
the passage of Act Cong. June 29, 1906 (24 containing none of his handwriting, held in-
Stat. 584, c. 3591).-Mottley v. Louisville & admissible as against him, in the absence of oth-
N. R. Co. (C. C.) 406.

er evidence sufficient to connect him with the
* Evidence by affidavits held insufficient to sus- offense charged.--Sprinkle v. United States (C.
tain the burden resting upon the complainant C. A.) 56.
in a suit in a federal court in South Dakota
against citizens of that state to prove his alleged with the signature of the accused thereto ap-

*A letter written wholly on a typewriter,
citizenship in the state of Washington necessary pended with a stencil, held incompetent as evi-
to give the court jurisdiction.—Jones v. Subera dence against

such accused as a communication
(C. C.) 462.

purporting to have come from him, unless shown
Complainant held entitled to sue to quiet title to have been acknowledged by him as his letter,
and to remove a cloud in the federal courts in or acquiesced in or acted upon by him.-Sprinkle
the district where the land lay, and to join non- 1 v. United States (C. C. A.) 56.

*Point annotated. See syllabus.

« AnteriorContinuar »