Page images


[ocr errors]

§ 6. Effect of transfer of cause or pro-, and he proposes no amendments, it will be preceedings therefor.

sumed to contain all the evidence.-Columbia Where a decree provides that “defendants Nat. Bank v. German Nat. Bank (Neb.) 346. have 30 days to file a supersedeas bond, and

Instructions to a jury are proper matters of in the meantime no execution to issue," filing a bond within that time does not prevent the de record and need not be preserved by bill of cree's enforcement when the time expires, un

exceptions.-State v. Bartley (Neb.) 438. less an appeal be taken.-Oyster y. Bank (Iowa)

Where there is no bill of exceptions, the 523.

sufficiency of the evidence will not be reviewThe amendment of a judgment after appeal, ed.-Gay v. Reynolds (Neb.) 661. not materially changing the original judgment, Where, from inspection of the bill of excepheld not reversible error.-Parker v. Vinson (S. tions, it is obvious that the word "testimony" D.) 1023.

was used with reference to the evidence, and as § 7. Supersedeas or stay of proceedings. synonymous with it, it will be accorded such

A supersedeas bond held not invalid for want signification.-Woolworth v. Parker (Neb.) 1090. of consideration.-Lowe v. Riley (Neb.) 758. A mere rescript of the evidence and proceed

On an order to show cause issued in a fore- ings, as preserved by reporter, held not a stateclosure suit, and served on the parties to a su

ment of the case on appeal.-Brynjolfson v. persedeas bond, held, that the court might en

Thingvalla Tp. (N. D.) 284.
ter a judgment against them for the rents and $11. Abstracts of record.
profits.-Lowe v. Riley (Neb.) 758.

Under Code, $ 4118, and Sup. Ct. Rules, $ 22.
A supersedeas bond conditioned to account an abstract of record is deemed complete unless
for the rents and profits in a foreclosure suit defects be specified by denial or additional ab-
held conditioned to account for the full rental stract.-McGillivray v. Case (Iowa) 483.-
value.-Lowe v. Riley (Neb.) 758.

Under Code, $ 4118, and Sup. Ct. Rules, $ 22, An order appointing a receiver cannot be su

an abstract of record is deemed complete unperseded as a matter of right; hence the low- less defects be specified by denial or additioner court may impose conditions.-Lowe v. Riley al abstract.--State v. Whitcomb (Iowa) 485. (Neb.) 758.

An abstract will not be stricken because it A surety on a bond superseding an order ap- does not contain all the evidence, where it conpointing a receiver becomes a party to the suit. tains everything essential to enable the court -Lowe v. Riley (Veb.) 758.

to pass on the errors urged.-McDermott v. AbA bond held insutlicient to supersede an order

ney (Iowa) 505. appointing a receiver in foreclosure proceed- $ 12. Authentication and certificaings.-Lowe v. Riley Neb.) 758.

tion. § 8. Record and proceedings not in rec- ceptions cannot be considered where not proper

Document attached to transcript as bill of exord-Matters to be shown by rec- ly authenticated.--Coad v. Barry (Neb.) 341.

Where the pleadings are not all before the ap-

A bill of exceptions not authenticated by clerk
pellate court, it cannot determine that the issues of trial court will not be considered.-Ğay v.
did not warrant the decree.-Citizens' Bank v. Reynolds (Neb.) 661.
Johnson (Iowa) 1046.

Judgment will be affirmed where supported by Jurisdiction of district court to review final the pleadings, unless the bill of exceptions is order of inferior court does not attach until certified by the clerk as either the original or duly-authorized transcript of the record is filed. the transcript ordered made a part of the recNew Home Sewing-Jach. Co. v. Thornburg ord.--Crawford v. Smith (Neb.) 1078. (Neb.) 86.

$ 13.

§ 9. Scope and contents of record. In an equitable action the filing of the re-

Where the evidence is not brought up, an in- porter's transcript after a la pse of six months
struction will not be held erroneous as telling after entry of the decree is too late to author-
the jury what certain evidence tends to show, ize a new trial in the appellate court.-Ring v.
where the question whether such evidence is Froelich (Iowa) 506.
true is left for the jury.-Martin v. Curtis

$ 14. Defects, objections, amend(Mich.) 690.

ments, and correction. Failure of the trial court to write the word Where an amendment curing a defect in ab"Given" on the margin of a numbered portion stract is filed seasonably after defect discovof its charge held no reason for nonconsidera-ered, it will not be stricken as too late, or as tion of the instruction by the appellate court. a surprise, appellee having argued the case on -McClellan v. Hein (Neb.) 120.

the merits.-Steckel v. Standley (Iowa) 489. A statement of the exceptions held properly a Appellant's motion submitted with the case part of the record. --State v. Bartley (Neb.) 438. to consider evidence stricken from the record

will not be sustained, appellee having no oppor$ 10.

Necessity of bill of exceptions, tunity for argument on the evidence.-Citizens' case or statement of facts.

Bank v. Johnson (Iowa) 1046.
Where the record does not contain all of the
evidence, a verdict will not be reversed on the

Jurisdiction of the appellate court attaches ground that the evidence shows it to be a com

where the petition in error and transcript are promise verdict.-Stevenson v. Detroit & M. filed within the prescribed year, and after the Ry. Co. (Mich.) 247.

expiration of that time the transcript may be

amended.--Moss v. Robertson (Neb.) 403. Error in refusing a new trial will not be reviewed if the order of refusal, the reasons & 15. Conclusiveness of record. therefor, and exceptions to the decision are not An objection that no testimony was received contained in the bill of exceptions.--Stevenson | must be overruled, where the record shows that v. Detroit & M. Ry. Co. (Mich.) 247.

all that was offered was received.-Broadwater An objection not preserved in bill of review, v. Foxworthy (Neb.) 1103. and not shown to have been presented in trial

$ 16. court, cannot be raised on appeal.-Berkey v.

Questions presented for reBurchard (Mich.) 635; Burchard v. Berkey,

view. Id.; Lord v. Dix, Id.

Where there is no bill of exceptions, and con

clusions on evidence are challenged, the judgWhere bill of exceptions purporting to contain ment will be affirmed.-Village of Arlington v. all the evidence is submitted to adverse party, Barothy (Neb.) 52.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]


[ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors]

Entire omission from bill of exceptions of An erroneous record cannot be first assailed
evidence sustaining averment of appellant's pe-on appeal.-Bader v. Dyer (Iowa) 469.
tition necessitates affirmance. Hoffman v.

Where party moves for leave to file claim
Becker (Neb.) 53.

against receiver after time for filing had expired, In the absence of the evidence, the court will alleging excusable neglect, he cannot, on appeal, presume that the court below had legal evidence claim that the time for filing had not expired. on which to base its findings.-Parker v. Vinson Hove v. Bankers' Exch. Bank (Minn.) 967. (S. D.) 1023.

Where the record shows a case dismissed for $ 17. Assignment of errors.

want of jurisdiction, that question will be exAn assignment that “the court erred in sus

amined, though the record sustains finding for

defendant on the merits.--Hesser v. Johnson taining plaintiff's motion to set aside the verdict” is not sufficiently specific.-Battin v. City (Neb.) 406. of Marshalltown (Iowa) 493.

Alleged error in verdict will not be considered Appellant cannot object to the court's failure when not raised by motion for new trial or peto limit evidence to the particular purpose for tition in error.-Hart v. Weber (Neb.) 1085. which it was admissible, where no request was Evidence may be reviewed without motion made to so limit it, and no error was assigned for new trial to determine error in directing for such failure.- Hasbrouck v. Western Union verdict.-Dunn v. National Bank of Canton (S. Tel. Co. (Iowa) 1031.

D.) 111. Excess in amount of recovery cannot be con- $ 21. Interlocutory, collateral, and sidered when not assigned as error.-Ham

supplementary proceedings and mond v. Edwards (Neb.) 75.

questions. Error in the assessment of the amount of

Code Civ. Proc. $ 275, authorizing appeal from recovery is not presented in an action based on interlocutory order, does not preclude review contract by an assignment that the verdict is

of order on general appeal after final judgnot sustained by the evidence.-Nye & Schnei- ment.-M. H Seeds Dry-Plate Co. v. Heyn der Co. v. Snyder (Neb.) 118.

Photo-Supply Co. (Neb.) 660.
An assignment of error directed to a group will consider only objections raised below.-

On appeal from confirmation of sale the court
of rulings on a certain class of evidence raises Toscan v. Devries (Neb.) 669.
only the question of the admissibility of the
evidence as a whole.- Nye & Schneider Co. v.

Overruling of a motion of defendant to re. Snyder (Neb.) 118.

quire plaintiff in an action to foreclose a mortWhere joint assignments of error are not with the petition held reversible error.-First

gage securing a note to file a copy of the note good as to all persons joining therein, they must Nat. Bank v. Engelbercht (Neb.) 685. be overruled.-Levy v. South Omaha Sav. Bank (Neb.) 769.

Errors in procedure at or before the trial

cannot be reviewed on appeal.-National Life An assignment of “errors of law occurring at Ins. Co. v. Martin (Neb.) 769. the trial" presents nothing for review.-Hart v. Weber (Neb.) 1085.

$ 22. Presumptions. Assignment of error that there was error in

The record held to require an assumption that overruling motion for new trial held too in Manning v. Nelson (Iowa) 503.

a party appeared at the hearing of a motion.definite, where motion was based on several grounds.-Hart v. Weber (Neb.) 1085.

A finding that a judgment debtor did not have An assignment that there was error in over- cient to support à decree of insolvency, the de.

sufficient property to pay his debts held suffiruling motion for new trial held insufficient, where such motion was based on several grounds. Bank v. Johnson (Iowa) 1046.

of insolvency not appearing.-Citizens' --National Masonic Acc. Ass’n v. Burr (Neb.) 1098.

It will be presumed that the case was tried

on the theory that property seized for tax was An assignment must be specific to obtain re-worth more than the tax, and judgment for deview of error in denial of cross-examination as fendant will not be reversed because it might to a single question.-Honaker v. Vesey (Neb.) have been worth less. — Forster V. Brown 1100.

(Mich.) 646. Certain assignments of error considered, and Where return from judgment of dismissal held insufficient.-Brynjolfson v. Thingvalla Tp. fails to show what became of motion made to (N. D.) 284.

strike out a reply as sham, it cannot be pre

sumed that the motion was granted.-Floberg § 18. Briefs.

v. Joslin (Minn.) 557. Supreme court rule 9 (59 N. W. v.), prescribing the requirements of briefs under penalty

There is no presumption that questions subof having costs for printing the same disallow. mitted at trial of facts have been established ed. applied. – Kuenster v. Woodhouse (Wis.) beyond special findings made.-Oliver v. Lansing 165.

(Neb.) 802.

A finding that one party to an action has a $ 19. Dismissal, withdrawal, or aban- judgment against the other in a collateral suit donment.

held not to warrant inference that such judg. Where, on appeal, nothing remains but a ques- ment is based on specific claim.-Oliver v. Lantion of costs. the appeal will be dismissed.-Mol- sing (Neb.) 802. ler v. Gottsch (Iowa) 859.

Where record shows adjournment of court to Sup. Ct. Rule No. 4, in regard to serving writ- future day and judicial proceedings in the inten notice where appellant fails to make the terval, it will be presumed that there was a vaproper return within 60 days after the appeal cation of the order of adjournment.-Green y. is perfected, held not to affect the right of re- Morse (Neb.) 925. spondent to move for a dismissal of the appeal for noncompliance with Rule 11 (66 N..: the amount of plaintiff's claim as established in

In the absence of bill of exceptions showing iv.).-In re Bank of Minnesota (Minn.) 239; jlatice court, held, the justice's jurisdiction In re Plymouth Clothing Co., Id.

would be presumed.-Mathews v. Ripley (Wis.) $ 20. Review.-Scope and extent in gen

718. eral.

$ 23.

Discretion of lower court. Matter not urged in appellant's argument in Facts held not to show an abuse of discretion chief will not be specially considered.-King v. of a trial court in setting aside a default judgWells (Iowa) 338.

ment.--First Nat. Bank v. Brown (Iowa) 507.


[ocr errors][ocr errors]


Where a party is entitled to new trial under On appeal on exceptions to findings of fact by a proper exercise of judicial discretion, the the court, all fair doubts are to be resolved in grant will not be reviewed, though the court favor of the decision below.-Menz v. Beebe may have erred as to the law.-In re Riven- (Wis.) 913. burgh's Estate (Minn.) 422; Voge v. Penney, Id.

On appeal from judgment in action tried by

the court on exceptions to findings, evidence will On appeal from an order vacating a judgment be examined to see whether it sustains the findby default the only question to be determined is ing.-Menz v. Beebe (Wis.) 913. whether the court abused its discretion.--Boutin v. Catlin (Wis.) 910.

8 25. Harmless error. $ 24. Questions of fact, verdicts, and had conveyed his interest in land was not prej.

An error in finding that a tenant in common findings. Where evidence is such that finding by the udicial, it being found that the interest was recourt cannot be said to be unauthorized, it will conveyed to him.-Bader v. Dyer (Iowa) 469. not be disturbed.—Carson v. Caward (Iowa) Error in sustaining a demurrer to an aver488.

ment held cured by permitting an averment to A finding of the trial court, sustained by the stand which raised the issue as completely as evidence, will not be reversed on appeal.-Or- did the averment held bad. Johnson v. Chicago, man v. Smith (Iowa) 526.

R. I. & P. Ry. Co. (Iowa) 476. Where the evidence is conflicting, the judg

The erroneous admission of evidence as to ment will not be disturbed if there was evi- the loss of profits from the breach of a contract dence to sustain it.-Spafford v. Keenan (Iowa) held not prejudicial to defendant, where the un1050.

disputed evidence showed the immediate damA ruling on conflicting evidence will not be ages to be in excess of the verdict.-Black v. disturbed.-- First Nat. Bank v. Hahn (Neb.) Des Moines Manufacturing & Supply Co. 50.

(Iowa) 504. A verdict on conflicting evidence will not be

An instruction referring to an unsigned memset aside. - Brong v. Spence (Neb.) 54; Ham- orandum of a contract as a written contract is mond v. Edwards (Neb.) 75.

harmless.--McDermott v. Abney (Iowa) 505. Questions of fact on conflicting evidence will Defendant held not harmed by an erroneous not be reviewed.-Lydick v. Gill (Neb.) 340.

admission of evidence, where the jury were inVerdict on conflicting evidence will not be dis- structed to disregard it.-Gwinn v. King (Iowa)

834. turbed.-Parlin, Orendorff & Martin Co. v. brecht (Neb.) 355.

Erroneous statements in instructions submitConflicting evidence will not be weighed on ap- authority on an agent to the jury, when they

ting an issue as to whether telegrams conferred peal.-Orosby v. Bastedo (Neb.) 364.

conferred such authority as matter of law, and Findings of fact on conflicting evidence will the jury so found by their verdict, held not prej. not be disturbed.--Feil v. Kitchen Bros. Hotel udicial error.--Hasbrouck v. Western Union Tel. Co. (Neb.) 344; Gates v. Johnson (Neb.) 407. Co. (Iowa) 1034.

Questions of fact determined on uncontro- Submission of an issue, as to whether televerted evidence will not be reviewed.-Frenzer grams conferred authority on an agent to setv. Phillips (Neb.) 668.

tle a claim, to the jury, when they conferred Verdict on conflicting evidence will not be such authority, as matter of law, held not prejudisturbed.-Foss v. Streator (Neb.) 764.

dicial error, where the jury must have so found

in rendering the verdict they did.-Hasbrouck v. Findings of fact on conflicting evidence will | Western Union Tel. Co. (Iowa) 1031. not be disturbed.-Des Moines Ins. Co. y. Davis (Neb.) 778.

Where portions of letter offered were excluded,

and there was nothing prejudicial in the part A judgment on special findings will be re- admitted, reading part of excluded portion withversed where they are not sufficient to sustain out further objection held no ground for reversal. it.-Oliver v. Lansing (Neb.) 802.

-Kimball Bros. v. Deere, Wells & Co. (Iowa) A verdict on conflicting evidence will not be 1041. disturbed.-Fellers v. Penrod (Neb.) 1085.

Improper remarks of counsel that were not Where parties rested the priority of their prejudicial will not justify a reversal.--Avery liens on the determination of a definite stated V. Burrall (Mich.) 272. question, the court will not settle them in ac- Error in excluding a question irrelevant excordance with other facts existing in the case. cept to show bias was harmless where the -Woolworth v. Parker (Neb.) 1090.

bias was otherwise shown.-Landry v. Landry Judgment on conflicting evidence will not be (Mich.) 630. reversed unless manifestly wrong.- National Ma

Disregard of defect in initial letter in name sonic Acc. Ass'n v. Burr (Neb.) 1098.

of one of the parties, where there was plea to Findings on conflicting evidence will not be the merits by the other party, held not redisturbed.--Honaker v. Vesey (Neb.) 1100. versible error.-Stever v. Brown (Mich.) 701. Where record shows that an equity case has

Where evidence is offered for particular purbeen tried at law by a jury, order of trial court pose, its rejection is not reversible error, though setting aside the verdict will not be disturbed, it was admissible for another purpose, to which though no objection was made by either party the attention of the court was not called.--Maras to such trial.- Prondzinski v. Garbutt (N. D.) eck v. Minneapolis Trust Co. (Minn.) 428. 1012.

An instruction misstating the facts which may A judgment in equity, supported by the evi- have prejudiced the jury held ground for reverdence, will not be reversed for failure of the sal.- Ward v. Ward (Minn.) 963. trial court to make a finding of fact necessary to support it.-Disch v. Timm (Wis.) 196.

Exclusion of evidence held harmless error,

where matter that it tended to establish was conWhere a controverted fact is determined by clusively shown by other evidence.-Thielen v. the trial court, it must stand unless contrary to Randall (Minn.) 992. the clear preponderance of the evidence.Meyer v. Hope (Wis.) 720.

Where verdict is clearly right, judgment will

be atlirmed, though there may have been errors Findings of the lower court will not be dis- at the trial.- United States School-Furniture turbed unless clearly contrary to the weight of Co. v. School Dist. No. 87, Lancaster County the evidence.-Cunningham v. Rodby (Wis.) 740. (Neb.) 62.

Admission of immaterial evidence, if prejudi- , $ 28. Modification.
cial, held ground for reversal.-Omaha Nat. Judgment of affirmance modified to correct
Bank v. Robinson (Neb.) 73.

erroneous computation. — Lewis v. Holdrege
Errors in admission of evidence or in instruc. (Neb.) 656.
tions not prejudicial are no ground for re- $ 29. Reversal.
versal.-Omaha Yat. Bank v. Robinson (Neb.) A judgment will be reversed where the court

took from the jury an issue on which the eviAdmission of incompetent or immaterial tes-dence was inconclusive.-Wilkinson v. City of timony is no ground for reversal, if not preju

Crookston (Minn.) 797. dicial.-McClellan v. Hein (Neb.) 120.

A judgment will be reversed where trial court An inapplicable instruction is not ground for dence was conclusive against plaintiff.-Wilkin

submitted to jury an issue on which the evireversal unless it was prejudicial.-McClellan son v. City of Crookston (Minn.) 797. v. Hein (Neb.) 120.

Where, under pleadings and evidence, plaintiff A judgment will not be reversed for the er- was entitled to recover a greater sum than roneous admission of evidence if the facts had awarded him, if at all, the judgment will be realready been testified to.-Barr v. Post (Neb.) versed.-Yager v. Exchange Nat. Bank (Neb.) 123.

768. On a question of personal injuries received by $ 30. Mandate and proceedings in plaintiff, the rejection of an hypothetical ques

lower court. tion put to defendant's expert witness held Amendment of judgment of dismissal on the harmless.-Barr v. Post (Neb.) 123.

ground that the complaint failed to state cause Findings of trial court that a claim of home- of action so as to make it one of dismissal only, stead was not established hill not contrary to the made after appeal taken, cannot affect plainevidence.-Woolworth v. Parker (Neb.) 1090.

tiff's rights.-Floberg v. Joslin (Minn.) 557. A judgment in action tried to a court will Where judgment in replevin for a plaintiff not be reversed for admission of incompetent had been improperly excluded, on reversal the

after execution, on which defendant relied, evidence.- National Masonic Acc. Ass'n v. Burr (Neb.) 109.9.

cause will be remanded for new trial.-McDon

ald v. Fuller (S. D.) 581. Admission of inaccurate model of plan of ac

Plaintiff's failure to pay costs cident held harmless error.---Rudiger v. Chicago, within one year after reversal of his judgment,

on appeal St. P., M. & 0. Ry. Co. (Wis.) 169.

as required by 2 Rev. St. 1898, § 3072, held not Failure in making findings of law and fact waived by defendant's participating in further as required by Rev. St. § 2863, is not ground proceedings under objection. -Christianson v. for reversal of a judgment of dismissal, the Pioneer Furniture Co. (Wis.) 174. evidence showing that plaintiff had no cause 2 Rev. St. 1898, 8 3072, reposes no discretion of action.--Getty v. Schantz (Wis.) 191. in the trial court to relieve plaintiff from pay

Admission in evidence of newspaper publica- ing costs, on rerersal of a judgment in his
tion containing matter relevant to the issue, favor, as a prerequisite to further proceedings.
and tending to inflame the jury, though contain: 1 --Christianson v. Pioneer Furniture Co. (Wis.)
ing some evidence which may properly be re- 174.
ceived, is prejudicial error.-Green v. Ashland

Water Co. (Wis.) 722.
Error in allowing counsel to read law to jury

Appeal from municipal court to district court held harmless, unless it appears that objecting on questions of fact and law constitutes a genparty was prejudiced.-Boltz v. Town of Sulli- eral appearance, and a waiver of any previous van (Wis.) 870.

want of jurisdiction. McCubrey v. Lankis

(Minn.) 144. A finding by the jury that an employé was

Failure to serve a conditional order of renot guilty of contributory negligence, held not to vivor goes only to the jurisdiction of the percure the error of making the question whether son, and is waived by a voluntary general aphe apprehended the danger a part of a question pearance. - Missouri Pac. Ry. Co. v. Fox (Neb.) as to whether he had knowledge of the condi

130. tion of the appliances used.-Dugal v. City of Chippewa Falls (Wis.) 878.

A general appearance by defendant confers

jurisdiction though no summons was served.Admission of incompetent evidence in trial by State v. Smith (Web.) 384. the court is net reversible error.--Merriman v.

Unless the petition discloses that the court McCormick Harvesting Mach. Co. (Wis.) 880.

has no jurisdiction over defendant, he must

call the court's attention thereto by special ap8 26. Error waived in appellate court.

pearance, and, if his motion be overruled, stand A point not argued on appeal will be passed.

on the special appearance. — Lowe v. Riley -Seery v. Murray (Iowa) 1058.

(Neb.) 758. $ 27. Determination and disposition of

APPLIANCES. cause-Affirmance. Where two defendants join in motion for Liability of employer for defects, see "Master

and Servant," $$ 3–8. new trial and in petition in error, the judgment will be affirmed unless there is error prejudicial to both.—Brong v. Spence (Neb.) 54.

APPLICATION. Where transcript is so incomplete as not to Of payment, see "Payment," § 2. affirmatively show error, the proper order is affirmance, and not dismissal.--Hesser v. Johnson (Neb.) 106.

APPOINTMENT. Where conclusion of jury was the only one of executor or administrator, see “Executors permissible under the evidence, the judgment and Administrators," $ 2. will be affirmed.-First Nat. Bank v. Smith Of receiver, see "Receivers," $ 2. (Neb.) 1073.

Where decision on the only claim as to owner- ARGUMENT OF COUNSEL. ship relied on below was sustained on appeal, the judgment will be affirmed, though there was

See "Trial," $ 3. evidence affecting the title on some other ground. In criminal prosecutions, see “Criminal Law,” -Frei v. McMurdo (Wis.) 915.

8 6.

[ocr errors]


8 5.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]



Transfers of particular species of property,

rights, or instruments. See “Militia."

See "Bills and Notes,” $$ 3, 4; "Chattel Mort

gages," $ 6; “Covenants,” g 1; "Mortgages," ARRAIGNMENT. See “Criminal Law," $ 3.

8 1. Requisites and validity.

An oral assignment of an account book and ac

counts therein, coupled with transfer of possesARREST.

sion, held valid.- Preston v. Peterson (Iowa) 861. Illegal arrest, see "False Imprisonment."

Evidence held to sustain finding that assignOn execution, see "Execution," $ 7.

ment under which appellant claims was made to

secure a loan which had been paid.-Lytle v. On criminal charges.

Chicago G. W. Ry. Co. (Minn.) 975. The constitutional privilege of a legislator from arrest will be waived if he appears. volo in profits of land purchased by another duty to

A contract imposing on party having interest untarily gives bail, and subsequently pleads, without pleading his privilege.--State v. Pola- pay taxes held assignable.-Alden v. Geo. w. check (Wis.) 708.

Frank Imp. Co. (Neb.) 369. The arrest of a legislator while constitution- $ 2. Operation and effect. ally exempt is not void, since the exemption is Assignment of contract construed, and held to a personal privilege only.-State v. Polacheck be an assignment of the benefits of a contract, (Wis.) 708.

not a repudiation of its burdens.-Alden v. Geo. Bribery is not a felony, within Const. art. 4, W. Frank Imp. Co. (Neb.) 369. 815, exempting members of the legislature $ 3. Actions. from arrest in cases other than treason, felony, and breach of the peace.-State v. Polacheck of claim before garnishment of the same.

Evidence held insufficient to show assignment (Wis.) 708.

Ackerson v. Svea Assur. Co. of Gothenburg

(Minn.) 419. ARREST OF JUDGMENT. In civil actions, see "Judgment," § 4.



§ 1. Requisites and validity. f 1. Civil liability.

Circumstances attending the execution of Evidence held to sustain a verdict for plain- mortgages by an insolvent debtor held not suffitiff for assault and battery.-Barr P'ost cient to constitute them a part of the general (Neb.) 123.

| assignment made at the same time, but that

they were separate and valid instruments.Damages of $2.000 held not excessive in a Creglow v. Eichhorn (Iowa) 526. civil action for assault and battery.-Barr v. Post (Xeb.) 123.

Conveyance accepted in good faith, in pay

ment of valid indebtedness, is not rendered void In a civil suit for damages for assault and by fact that debtor intended it as part of asbattery, evidence of defendant's reputation is signment for benefit of creditors. First Nat. properly rejected.-Barr v. Post Neb.) 123. Bank v. Garretson (Iowa) 856; Beloit State

In a civil suit for damages for assault and Bank v. Same, Id.; North Granville Nat. Bank battery, evidence that defendant had never v. Same, Id. been arrested is inadmissible.-Barr v. Post An assignment with preference cannot be at(Neb.) 123.

tacked by one who is not a creditor of assignor. In a civil suit for assault and battery, where -First Nat. Bank v. Garretson (Iowa) 856; the answer is a general denial, evidence of jus- Beloit State Bank v. Same, Id.; North Granville tification is inadmissible.-Barr v. Post (Neb.) Nat. Bank v. Same, Id. 123.

A chattel mortgage is not an assignment for § 2. Criminal responsibility.

creditors, within 3 How. Ann. St. $ 87490, proOne assaulted has the right to repel force with viding that, if an insolvent makes such asforce.--State v. Goering (Iowa) 327.

signment, a labor claimant may proceed in

chancery to establish his as a preferred claim. A charge on self-defense was properly re- -Wineman v. Fisher Electrical Mfg. Co. fused where accused's own testimony was suf- (Mich.) 245. ficient to sustain a conviction, and there was no testimony warranting the charge.--People v.

Conveyance by a firm in good faith to secure Williams (Mich.) 248.

certain debts held not an assignment for creditors, but a mortgage, and valid, though debt

ors were insolvent.–Dyson v. Johnson (Minn.) ASSESSMENT.

236. Of compensation for property taken for public the assignment law is not invalidated by a gen

A transfer made without intention to evade use, see “Eminent Domain.” $ 2. Of damages, see "Damages," § 4.

eral assignment within 30 days, under Comp. Of expenses of public improvements, see “High- St. c. 6, $$ 42, 43.--Blair State Bank v. Stewart ways, $$ 2, 3; "Municipal Corporations," 88

(Neb.) 370. 5-10.

An assignee cannot, without the written conOf loss on insured, see "Insurance," $ 5.

sent of creditors, assail a conveyance made by Of tax, see “Taxation," $ 2.

the assignor as in fraud of creditors.-Blair State

Bank v. Stewart (Neb.) 370.

A mortgage given to secure a debt, and in

consideration that the mortgagee pay certain See "Appeal and Errur," 17.

notes of the mortgagor, held not a voluntary as

signment.-Cunningham v. Rodby (Wis.) 740. ASSIGNMENTS.

82. Administration of assigned estate.

Laborers who work in coal mine, after a sale Fraud as to creditors, see "Fraudulent Convey- thereof by assignee for creditors, are not entiances," $ 1.

tled to preference for their claims out of pro

« PreviousContinue »