« AnteriorContinuar »
Indianapolis, etc. Co. v. Pitzer, S. C. Ind., 237.
In re Staten Island, etc. Co. N. Y. C. App., 542.
Jones v. Dow, S. J. O. Mass., 309.
Kalis v. Shatuck, S. C. Cal., 165.
, . ,
Little v. Giles, S. C. C. S., 574.
Livingston v. L'Eagle, s. C. Fla., 93.
Louisrille, etc Co. v. Allan, S. C. Ala., 417.
Louisvlile, etc Co. v. Citizens, etc, Co , S. C. U. S. 81.
Louisville, etc. R. R. Co. v. Dooley, S. O. Ala., 211, 359.
Louisville, etc. Co. v. Johnson, s. C. Ala., 139.
LOUISVILLE, ETC. CO. V. KATZENBERGER, S. C. Tenn., 147.
Louisville, etc. R. R. Co. v. Meyer, 8. C. Ála., 19.
Louisville, etc. Co. v. Oden, s. C. Ála., 166.
Louisville, etc. Co. v. Pedigo, S. C. Ind., 570.
Lombard v. Batchelder, $. C. Vt., 308.
Longstroth v. Golding, N. J. Ch. Ct., 181.
Lott v. Mobile County, S. C. Ala., 308.
Low v. Warden, S. C. Cal., 162.
Luck v. Luck, S. C. Pa., 407.
Luco v. Commercial Bank, etc. S. C. Cal., 379.
Lyon v. Hayden, s. C. Vt., 454, 475.
Lyon v. Hersey, N. Y. Ct. Appl., 547.
Mackey v. Winkler, s. C. Wis., 592.
Mackbee and Wife v. Fields, Ct. App. Ky., 453.
Manstield Machine Works v. Lowell, s. O. Mich., 213.
Manning v. Meredith, S. C. Iowa, 429.
Marcum v. Commonwealth, Ky. Ct. of App., 596.
Marks v. Spencer, S. C. App. Va., 141.
Massey v. Mutual, etc. Society, N. Y. Ct. App., 162, 331.
Marston v. Marston, S. C. N. H., 380.
Martin v. Carver, Ky. Ct. App., 238.
Martin v. Splivalo, S. C. Cal., 236.
Maught v. Getrendanner, Md. Ct. App., 278.
MAYWOOD Co. v. VILLAGE OF MAYWOOD, S. C. III.,
McAlester v. Sanders, S. C. Cal., 234.
McCabe and Cunning's Case, 8. C. R. I., 404.
McChord v. Noe, Ky. Ct. App., 518.
McClure v. Lariinore, s. C. Me., 498.
McClure v. Otrich, S. C. II., 597.
MCCOY'S CASE. MD. CT. APP., 292.
McDevitt's Appeal, s. C. Penn., 167.
McDowell v. Brantley, S. C. Ala., 94.
McGivney v. McGivney, S. J. Ct. Mass., 166, 263.
McGraw v. Dale, 8. C. Mich., 476.
McGuffey v. Humes, s. C. Tenn., 476.
McGuire v. Selden, N. Y. Ct. App., 548.
McIntosh v. Hill, S. C. Ark., 551.
Mckee v. Coffin, S. C. Texas, 307.
Mckim v. Hibbard, S. J. Ct. Mass., 402, 405.
McKinney y. Crady, Ky, Ct. App., 404.
McLane y. Leicht, S. C. Iowa, 427.
McLean v. Hess, s. C. Ind., 333:
McLeod v. Evans, S. C. Wis., 283.
McMahon v. Bardinger, S. C. Penn., 44.
McMillan v. Bissell, s. C. Mich., 501.
McMillan v. McCormick, 8. C. II., 263.
McNally v. Connolly, S. C. Cal., 141.
McQueen v. Logan, S. C. Ala., 69, 190.
Meade v. Conroe, s. C. Penn., 405.
Meiss v. Gill, S. C. Ohio, 91.
Mellier v. Bartlett, S. C. Mo., 45.
Melvin v. St. Louis, etc. Co., S. C. Mo., 311.
Memphis Bell, etc. Co v. Húnt, S. C. Tenn., 214.
Menk v. Commercial Ins. Co., s. C. Cal., 382.
Mergentheim v. State, s. C. Ind., 548.
Millard v. Marmon, S. C. Ill., 118.
Miller v. Chappel, $. C. Minn., 263.
Miller v. Madden, S. C. kan., 214.
Miller v. State, s. C. Ind., 235.
Miller v. Wolbert, S. C. Iowa, 500.
Millet v. People, s. C. m., 187.
Minneapolis v. Śt. Paul, etc. R. Co., 8. C. Minn., 382.
Minter y. Durham, S. C. Oreg., 92.
Missouri, etc. Co. v. Stevens, s. C. Kan., 525.
Mitchell'v. Colglazier, S. C. Ind., 380.
Mitchell v. Mitchell, S. C. Penn., 525.
Modawell v. Hudson, S. C. Ala., 161.
Morgan, etc. Co. v. Board of Health, S. O. U. S., 377.
Moore v. Des Moines, etc. Co., 8. C. Iowa, 546.
Moore v. Phønix, etc. Co., S. C. N. H., 500.
orse v. Church, S. C. R. I., 312.
Mulcairns v. Janesville, S. C. Wis., 474.
Mullen v. Vermont, etc. Co., S. O. Vt., 118, 189.
Mulread v. State, S. C. Ind., 332.
Munnell v. Orear, ky. Ct. App., 596.
Munson v. Syracuse, etc. Co., N. Y. Ct. App., 477,
Murchie v. Gates, s. c. Me., 69.
Murphree v. Bishop, S. C. Ala., 189.
Mushrush v. Devereaugh, s. C. Neb., 117.
Mutual, etc. Co. v. De Haven, S. C. Penn., 358.
Mynatt v. Hudson, s. C. Texas, 262.
Myrick v. Merritt, s. C. Fla., 191.
Neier v. Mo., Pacific, etc., Co., 8. C. Mo., 345,
New faven, etc., Co. v. Linden, etc. Co., S. J. (, Mass.,
Richmond, etc. Co. v. Lynchburg, etc. Co., S. C. App. Va.,
O'Brien v. Gaslin, S. C. Neb., 598.
Powell v. Thompson, S. C. Ala., 117.
Riley v. Mitchell, S.C. Minn., 475.
Robb v. Carter, Md. Ct. App.,311.
Robards v. Lamb, s. C. Mo., 236.
Robinson v. County Commrs., S.J.C. Me., 69.
Robbins v. Robbins, Ky. Ct. App., 215.
Robinson v. Larabee, S.C. Vt., 406.
Robinson v. Fire Association, etc., 8. C. Mich., 525.
Robinson v. Kanawha, etc. Bk., S. C. Ohio, 547.
Rock v. Indian Orchard Mills, S. J, C. Mass., 573.
Rogers v. Olshoffsky, S. C. Penn., 45.
Roman Catholic Archbishop, etc. v, Shipman. S. C. Cal.,
Root v. Har), S. C. Mich., 186.
Roseborough v. State, Texas Ct. App., 426.
Rossmann v. Rossman, S. C. Mich., 187.
Rowe v. Hicks, S.C. Vt., 69.
ROYCE V. MALONEY, S. C. Vt., 267.
Ryan v. Long, S. C. Minn., 260.
Re Gilbert v. Matthews, Eng, Ct. App., 479,
Re Hunt's Trusts, Eng. Ct. App., 477.
Ee Moore, Moore v. Rocke, Eng. Ct. App., 503.
Re Old's Trust, Pengelly v. Herbert, Eng. Ct. App., 479.
Re Robrets Kiff v. Roberts, Eng. Ct. App., 479.
Safford y, Weare, S. J. C. Mass., 165.
SAGINAW, ETC. Co. v. CITY OF SAGINAW, U. S. C. C. for
Sanborn v. Madera, etc. Co., 8. C. Cal., 428.
Sanborn v. Potter, 8. C. Mich., 263.
Ssntry v. State, S. C. Wis., 570.
Saunders' Appeal, S. C. Conn., 430, 527.
Saville v. Welch, S. C. Vt., 283.
Sayles v. Bates, 8. C. R. I., 378.
Schallard v. Eel River, etc. Co., S. C. Cal., 377.
Schaller v. Wright, S. C. Iowa, 405,
Scheiber v. LeClaire, S, C. Wis., 476.
Schistenger v. Bridgeport, etc. Co., S. C. Conn., 356.
Schlessinger v. Mallard, S, C. Cal., 408.
Schmidt v. Kansas City Distilling Co., 8. C. Mo,, 573.
Schofield v. Stoddard, s. C. Vt., 236.
Scholle v. Scholie, X. Y. Ct. App., 178.
Schwenck v. Naylor, N. Y. Ct. App., 164, 287, 285, 385.
Scott's Appeal, $. C. Penn., 357.
Scott v. Chambers, 8. C. Mich., 260.
Scott v. Provident Ass'n, S. C. N. H., 92.
Seaver v. Fitzgerald, S. J. C. Mass. 285.
SEBRIGHT v. SCOTT, English Diverce Court, 578.
Seeley v. New York, etc. R. R. Co., N. Y. Ct. App., 166, 311.
Sieve v. Steinreide, Ky. Ct. App., 551.
Sims v. State, Ct. of App. Texas, 451,
Sims v. Steinreide, Ky. Ct, App., 551.
SEROKA V. KATTENBERG, English Ct. App., 364.
Setzler v. Pennsylvania, etc. Co., 8. C. Penn., 284.
SEXTON V. HAWKEYE, ETC. CO., S. C. Iowa, 385.
Shatto v. Abernethy, S. C. Minn., 429.
Shirley v. Thomasson, ky. Ct. Apr., 478.
Sherman v. Eakin, S. C. Årk., 501.
sherman v. Finch, S. C. Cal., 455.
Sherman v. Galbraith, S. J. C. Mass., 20.
Shuchart v. Clark, Ct. App. Ky,, 451.
Siegrist v. Schmoltz, 8. C. Penn,, 501.
Simpson v. Waldby, S. C. Mich., 571.
Shoe, etc. Bank v. Wood, S. J. C. Mass., 450, 594.
Shofield v. Stoddard, S. C. Vt., 403.
Shaver v. McCarthy, s. C. Penn., 334.
Skinner v. Withelm, S, C. Mich., 595.
Sleeper . Davis, S.C. N. H., 503.
Slocum y. Knosby, S. C. Iowa, 552.
SMILIE V. HOBBS, S. C. N. H., 377, 483.
Sunith's Appeal, S. C. Penn., 547.
Smith v. Briscoe, Md. Ct. App. 311.
Smith v. Davis, s. C. Fla., 91.
Smith v. Inge, S. C. Ala., 237.
sinith v. Lindsey, S. C. Mo., 12.
Smith v. Smith, S. C. Neb., 12.
Sneed v. State, S. O. Ark., 163.
Snoddy v. Leavitt, S. C. Ind., 21.
Show v. Holmes, s. C. Cal., 453.
Spalding v. Mattingly, Ct. App. Ky., 454.
SPIRITUALISTIC, ETC. ASSN. V. TOWN OF EAST LYNNE, S. C.
Springman v. Baltimore,etc. Co.,S. C. Dist. Columbia, 93.
Squires v. Chilicothe, s. C. Mo. 163.
South Covington, etc. Co. v. Hare, ('t. App. Ky., 453.
Southern Express Co. v. Glenn, S. C. Tenn.,
Southern Pacitic, etc. Co v. California, S. C. U. 8. 237.
State v. Archer, S. O. Iowa, 526.
State Sav. Assn. v. Barber, S. C. Kans., 139.
State v. Bulla. S. C. Mo., 595.
State v. Craig, S. C. N. J., 575.
State v. Clark, S. C. Mo., 65.
State v. Clark, 8. C, R. I., 331.
State v. County Commrs. S. C. Fla., 67.
State v. Crockett, S. C Mo., 547,
State v. Crockett and Smith, S. C. Mo., 588.
State v. Dawson, S. C. Mo., 571.
State v. Essex Public Road Board, N. J. (t. Err. & App.,
Stowe v. Phinney, S. C. Me., 21.
Vermont, etc. Convention v. Ladd, S. C. Vt, 70.
Vicksburg, etc. Co. v. Dennis, S. C. U. s. 16.
Vicksburg, etc. Co. v. Putman, S. C. U. S., 672.
Village of Hyde Park v. Washington Ice Co., 8. O. IN.
Vogle v. State, S. C. Ind., 407.
Wabash, etc. Co. v. Illinois, S.C. U. S., 561.
Wabash, etc. v. McDongal, s. C. III., 574.
Wagner v. State, S. C. Ind., 235.
Wait v. Axford, S. C. Mich., 497.
Walker v. Walker, S. C. N. H., 283, 286.
Wallace v. Crow, $. C. Texas, 357.
Wallace v. Dubois, Md. Ct. App., 45.
Walworth v. Jenness, S. C. Vt., 252.
Ward v. Dodd, Ct. of Chan. of N.J., 382.
Warren v. Steer, s. C. Penn., 142.
Weatherhead v. Stoddard, s. C. Vt., 334.
Western, etc. Co. v. State Board, etc., S. O. Ala., 323.
WEBSTER V. MORRIS, S. C. Wis., 26.
Weed S. M. Co. v. Winchell, S. 6. Ind., 234.
Weeks. v. Sowles, S. O. Vt., 549.
Weider v. Maddox, s. C. Texas. 53.
Weil v. Raymond, S. J. C. Mass., 379,
Wells v. Benton, 6. C. Ind., 525.
Weinstein v. Harrison, S. C. Texas, 549.
Western Assurance Co. v. Towle, s. C. Wis., 369.
Western, etc., Co. v. Cobb, s.'c. Ark., 503.
S. C. Ala., 187.
Wetherbee v. Fitch, 8. C. Ill., 260.
Wetherell v. Newington, S. C. Conn., 450.
Wetmore v. Fiske, S. C. R. I., 236, 379.
Weyand v. Stover, s. C. Kan., 162.
Wharton v. Brick, s. C. N. J., 571.
Wheelhouse v. Parr, S. J.C. Mass., 45.
White v. Douglass, s. C. Cal., 452.
White v. Kauffman, Md. Ct. App., 476, 478, 526.
Whitman v. Morey, S. C. N. H., 46.
Whitelaw, v. Memphis, etc. R. R. Co., S. C. Tenn., 165.
Whiting v. Burger, S. J. C. Me., 67.
Wiggin, Trustee, v. Perkins, S. C. N. H., 479.
Wilder v. Davenport, S. C. Vt., 403.
Wilds v. St. Louis, etc. Co., N. Y. Ct. App., 116.
Wilhite v. Spearman, S. C. Ala., 189.
Wilkins v. Litchfield, s. C. Iowa, 476.
Wilkes v. Georgia, etc. Co., 8. C. Ala., 91, 94, 154.
Willett v. Johnson, Ky. Ct. App., 549.
Willett v. Rich, 8. J. C. Mass., 359.
Willett v. Rutter, Ky. Ct. App. 551.
Williams v. Bunker, S. C. Me., 526.
Williams v. Flood, s. C. Mich., 551.
Williams Harvester Co. v. Pope, S. C. Iowa, 474.
Williams v. Moody, s. C. Minn., 43.
Williams v. Nichol, s. C. Ark., 284, 287.
Wilson v. Cottman, Md. Ct. App., 334.
Wilson v. Fenimore, S. C. Penn., 21.
Winchell v. Coney, S. C. Conn., 212.
Wingerter v. Wingerter, S. C. Cal., 455.
Wing v. Ansonia Clock Co., N. Y. Ct. App., 307.
Winters v. Fain, S. C. Ark., 599.
Witherell v. Stewart, S. C. Minn., 406.
Wistar v. Gillilan, s. C. Penn., 94.
Wong v. Astoria, s. C. Oreg., 117.
Wood Mowing Machine Co. v. Gaertner, s. C. Mich., 681.
Wood v. Maryland, Md. Ct. App., 357.
Wood v. State, S. C, Ark., 599.
Woods v. Waddle, S. C. Ohio, 524.
WOOD V. WEST VIRGINIA, ETC. CO., S. C. W. Va. 170.
Woodward, etc. Co., v. Jones, S. C. Ala. 296.
Wright v. Railroad Co., S. J. C. Mass., 333.
Wright v. Wright, N. J. Chan. C., 349.
Wyatt v. Commonwealth, Ky. Ct. App., 235.
Yates v. States, S. C Ark., 189.
Yick Wo v. Hopkins, S. C. U. S., 331.
Vance v. Upson, S, C. Texas, 238.
Personal Liability of Bank Officers-By L. K. Mihills,
port, Penn., 293.
Names of Corporations-By W. W. Thornton, Craw-
fordsville, Ind., 531.
Oharitable Uses-By Joseph 1. Joyce, Bridgeport, Conn.,
Negligence of Railway Passengers in Imminent Peril-
From The Irish Law Times, 559
A Plea for Strict Construction-By H. J. Desmond, Mil-
Nuisance by Noise in a Private House-From Solicitors'
Delivery of Deeds, By James P. Oliver, Chicago, Ill., 8.
Liabilities of; Railroad Companies for Injury to their
Employees-By D. H. Pingrey, Bloomington, III., 555.
Dram-shop Licenses-Validity on Qno Warranto-By
Refreshing Memory - Recollections Independent of
Memoranda-By Eugene McQuillin, St. Louis, Mo., 53.
Shares of Stock-Creditors and Assignees of Certificates
fordsville, Ind., 268.
-By Isaac H. Livnberger, St. Louis, Mo., 3.
Injuries to Children-By Albert N. Krupp, Milwaukee, State Regulation of Railway Corporations as to Freights
-By John W. Smith, Chicago, Ii., 101.
Are Judges Above Criticism?- Anon., 246.
Substitution of Mortgages-By M. W. Hopkins, Danville,
Judgments as Evidence Against Third Persons who are Ind., 579.
Responsible Over-By II, Campbell Black, Williams.
port, Penn., 412.
Vendor and Vendee--The Rule in Regard to Fixtures-
By George W. Warvelle, Chicago, Il., 485.
Llability of an Employer to an Employee Injured by the
Withdrawal of Plea of Guilty-By W. Hopkins, Dan-
ville, Ind., 76.
exhaustive debate in that body. The line of The Central Law Journal.
legislation recommended by the committee ST. LOUIS, JULY 2, 1886.
seems so judicious and desirable, that we wonder, not a little, at the vehemence of the
opposition manifested on the "skirmish line” CURRENT EVENTS.
of the preliminary debate- so opposed to
the teachings of Christianity, so inhuman," PROFESSIONAL CRIMINALS—At the last meet
are very strong terms to apply to a proposiing of the American Bar Association in Au tion to enable officers of the law to “keep gust, 1885, the Committee on Jurisprudence the run” of notorious and duly convicted and Law Reform, made a report on a resolu malefactors. It is certainly not an outrage tion which seems to have been pending in that to require a person who has been pronounced body since 1882, suggesting the proper prin- by the law to be a suspicious or dangerous ciple which should control the treatment of character, to report periodically at police habitual and professional criminals.
headquarters and to give an account of himAfter noticing the French practice on this self, and, as in France, when he changes his subject which requires that persons convicted residence, to do so only upon a passport, and of serious crimes should remain for life un upon his arrival at his destination, to pay der police supervision; and the "ticket of the local authorities the compliment of a leave” system of England initiated in 1840, personal call.
personal call. As to disfranchisement, we the report discusses the whole subject with cannot see that it is either inhuman or unmarked ability, and concludes by recommen christian to deny the felon the right to vote ding the adoption of three resolutions. The or hold office. There are so many men in first favors the enactment of laws in every the United States who are authorized, and genState, for keeping a complete record of every erally ready and willing to do either, or both, person convicted of felony or grave misde that the country will probably survive even meanor, for publishing such records, and ex if the felon's name be stricken from the list. changing them for like publications in other The resolutions proposed by the commitStates, together with a free use of the photo tee appear to us well calculated to lead the grapher's art in aid of the cause of justice. minds of the profession, and of legislators, inSecond, the committee recommends that in to a branch of jurisprudence which has been every State laws should be enacted, sentenc too much neglected: the prevention of crime. ing all persons who have been twice
Except the peace warrant, the statutory devicted of felony or grave misdemeanor to struction by officers of gambling implements, police supervision for life, or a stated term
and of illicit distilleries, we cannot at this moof years, and to political disfranchisement.
ment recall any cases in which the law acts Third, that drafts of such laws should be
upon the purely and literally preventive syscarefully prepared under the auspices of the tem. When the incorrigible rogue has served association with a view to their adoption by out his term in the State prison, he is at perthe several States.
fect liberty to resume the practice of his proThese resolutions produced a spirited de fession, without hindrance from the law, or bate which resulted in a postponement of the serious molestation from its officers. He is whole subject until the next meeting of the not bound to give any account to any one of association.
his coming and going, nothing can be done The report and resolutions were briefly no to prevent his committing another burglary ticed in this JOURNAL soon after the adjourn whenever an eligible apportunity may be ofment of the association, and we recur to the fered. The bully and desperado may be bound subject now chiefly to draw the attention of
over to keep the peace after he has paid his the profession to it, as the time is now near fine or submitted to the imprisonment inflictat hand when it will be again called up in the ed for his last fight, and no doubt thinks it an association, and will, no doubt, elicit a very outrage that he can not be permitted to thrash
any body for twelve long months; but against 1 21 Cent. Law Journal, 241.
the burglar, expert and professional, as he is, Vol. 23.-No. 1.