Assignor of a nonnegotiable note is not a necessary party in a suit thereon.-Barry v. Wachosky (Neb.) 1080. In action by assignee of nonnegotiable note, the original payee is not a necessary party.Barry v. Wachosky (Neb.) 1080. In action on certificate of deposit that had been transferred to plaintiff by one who obtained it through fraud, plaintiff has the burden of proving good faith.-Dunn v. National Bank of Canton (S. D.) 111. Question whether plaintiff had acquired certificate of deposit in good faith from payee, who claimed that it had been obtained by fraud, held a question of fact for the jury.-Dunn v. National Bank of Canton (S. D.) 111. BODY EXECUTION. See "Execution," § 7. BONA FIDE PURCHASERS. Of bill of exchange or promissory note, see "Bills and Notes." § 4. Of land, see "Vendor and Purchaser," § 3. · BONDS. ments and other acts done pursuant to an exact science, but not to his determination of disputed starting points.-Radford v. Johnson (N. D.) 601. Evidence held not to justify an instruction that "the line as fixed by the surveyor at this under Rev. time is presumptively correct," Codes, § 2028.-Radford v. Johnson (N. D.) 601. Bounds and starting points are questions of fact to be determined as in other cases.-Radford v. Johnson (N. D.) 601. Municipal bonds, see "Municipal Corporations," On appeal or writ of error, see "Appeal and § 12. Bonds in legal proceedings. See "Costs," § 2; "Injunction," § 4; "Replevin," § 7. Bonds in legal proceedings, see "Appeal and Error." 88 5, 7. § 1. Requisites and validity. Where condition exacted signature of another party to the instrument, the bond is not validated by a subsequent ratification of the sig; nature which had been written by unauthorized person. Morton v. Harvey (Neb.) 808. Where joint bond is signed on condition that others shall become parties, the bond is ineffective after delivery without compliance with such condition or subsequent waiver.-Morton v. Harvey (Neb.) 808. § 2. Construction and operation. Conditions of building contract held included in obligation of bond given to secure its procurement.-Morton v. Harvey (Neb.) 808. 3. Actions. Where on delivery of bond there appear irregularities on the face as to a requisite signature, and no investigation is made, it is a defense for the party signing the bond conditionally.-Morton v. Harvey (Neb.) 808. BOUNDARIES. 1. Description. In case of disputed boundaries the points marked by original monuments govern.-Radford v. Johnson (N. D.) 601. § 2. Evidence, ascertainment, and establishment. Code 1873, §§ 1490-1492, giving fence viewers jurisdiction of controversies over the erecting and maintaining of division fences, gives them no power to establish or adjudicate on division lines.-Boyd v. Shoop (Iowa) 482. The presumption of accuracy given to surveys of county surveyor by Rev. Codes, § 2028, refers to surveys made in compliance with that and succeeding sections, and to his measure Error," 18. BROKERS. See "Principal and Agent." § 1. Employment and authority. A wheat broker held to have had implied authority to advance money to pay margins and continue the deal directed to be made by the blut (Minn.) 970. principal.-Van Dusen-Harrington Co. v. Junge 2. Duties and liabilities to principal. for failure of the customer to pay margins, and Where a corporation broker closed out the deal another corporation purchased the same, held, that it was immaterial that officers of the two corporations were identical.-Van Dusen-Harrington Co. v. Jungeblut (Minn.) 970. A wheat broker held to have a right, on failout the deal by selling same on the open board ure of the customer to pay margins, to close of the chamber.-Van Dusen-Harrington Co. v. Jungeblut (Minn.) 970. 3. Compensation and lien. Where there is an agreement for a real-estate broker's commission, it, and not the value of his services, is the measure of damages.-McDermott v. Abney (Iowa) 505. Evidence held not sufficient to entitle a broker to recover commissions for the sale of land.— Antisdel v. Canfield (Mich.) 944. Evidence that a broker was acting in good faith, pursuant to a written request, and that the sale was secured through his efforts, held to require the submission to the jury of whether he earned a commission.-Bell v. Siemens & Halske Electric Co. (Wis.) 152. BUILDING AND LOAN ASSOCIATIONS. Fines imposed on a borrowing member of five cents on each share for the first default and ten cents for each subsequent default held not unreasonable.-Iowa Savings & Loan Ass'n v. Heidt (Iowa) 1050. Code 1873, c. 6, tit. 9, authorizing associations to receive premiums for the right of precedence for loans, held not to authorize such premiums exceeding legal interest, where there was competition for precedence.--Iowa Savings & Loan Ass'n v. Heidt (Iowa) 1050. no An association may retain, from a loan to a member, expenses incurred in making it. and a percentage of his shares for management expenses.-Iowa Savings & Loan Ass'n v. Heidt (Iowa) 1050. Acts 26th Gen. Assem. c. 85, § 9, declaring the amount recoverable from a borrower, held not to preclude such association from contracting to receive a smaller amount.-Iowa Savings & Loan Ass'n v. Heidt (Iowa) 1050. On foreclosure by foreign building association its rights with respect to interest are governed by Comp. St. c. 44, and, if more than 10 per cent. interest has been contracted for, the penalties for receiving usury under such chapter should be enforced.-National Mut. Building & Loan Ass'n v. Keeney (Neb.) 442. In foreclosure by foreign building association the rate of interest is not regulated by Sess. Laws 1891, c. 14, referring to domestic building associations only.-National Mut. Building & Loan Ass'n v. Keeney (Neb.) 442. Contract of subscriber for stock in building association construed, and held, that he could not have his monthly payments on stock applied in reduction of a loan made to him.-United States Savings & Loan Co. v. Shain (N. D.) 1006. Where a foreign building association loaned money to a member residing in the state, the mortgage given to secure the same can be enforced in the state, though the association has not complied with the statute under which foreign corporations can do business.-United States Savings & Loan Co. v. Shain (N. D.) 1006. Dismissal of a bill to set aside deeds for incompetency of the grantor, for failure of proof, held not error.-Corby v. Moran (Mich.) 930. ground that they were never delivered, and In action to cancel note and mortgage, on the were without consideration, held error to exclude certain evidence offered by defendant.-Thielen v. Randall (Minn.) 992. To entitle a party to be relieved on the ground of false representations of the other contracting party, he must prove that the representations believed and acted on them.-Murphey v. Illiwere made, that they were false, and that he nois Trust & Savings Bank (Neb.) 1102. Where a person exchanges property relying on false representations of the other party, he may rescind within a reasonable time after discovery of fraud, on returning what he had received.-Menz v. Beebe (Wis.) 913. § 2. Proceedings and relief. Complaint held to state cause of action.-Weirich v. Dodge (Wis.) 906. Where transaction is rescinded because of fraud, fraudulent vendee is liable to account for property received, and, if unable to restore, for the value, with interest, or, if he has sold it for more than its fair value, for amount received, with interest.-Menz v. Beebe (Wis.) 913. CANDIDATES. Where one voluntarily bids a premium in excess of that required by by-law of the building association, he cannot complain of such by-law. -United States Savings & Loan Co. v. Shain For office, see "Elections," § 1. (N. D.) 1006. Member of building and loan association borrowing money and giving mortgage and assign CARNAL KNOWLEDGE. ing stock as collateral held not entitled in action See "Rape." to foreclose mortgage by receiver of association to apply amount paid as dues on his stock on the mortgage debt.-Hale v. Cairns (N. D.) 1010. BURDEN OF PROOF. In civil actions, see "Evidence," § 3. BURGLARY. § 1. Prosecution and punishment. Evidence held insufficient to sustain conviction.-State v. Riggs (Minn.) 302. Different acts constituting part of the same transaction may be joined in the same indictment or count thereof.-Cunningham v. State (Neb.) 60. BY-LAWS. CARRIERS. § 1. Carriage of goods. The act of an express company in advancing the charges one cent on each package to be shipped held an invalid attempt to make the shippers pay the war revenue_tax.-Attorney General v. American Exp. Co. (Mich.) 317. Before action against carrier for failure to deliver goods to consignee, a demand must be made for them, unless it is not in power of carrier to deliver.-Jarrett v. Great Northern Ry. Co. (Minn.) 304. Complaint in action against carrier for failure to perform contract held not to show that any freight was due carrier.-Jarrett v. Great Northern Ry. Co. (Minn.) 304. Consignor may maintain action against carrier for failure to deliver when he, and not the con Of municipal corporation, see "Municipal Cor- signee, is owner of the goods.-Jarrett v. Great porations," § 2. CALENDARS. Computation of time, see "Time.” CANCELLATION OF INSTRUMENTS. See, also, "Quieting Title." Cancellation of insurance policy, see "Insurance," § 6. Rescission of contract, see "Contracts," § 3. § 1. Right of action and defenses. An executed conveyance will not be set aside for failure to perform a condition subsequent, where there has been a partial performance, ac Northern Ry. Co. (Minn.) 304. Facts held not to show negligence of a carrier in failing to ventilate a car of apples while in transit.-Densmore Commission Co. v. Duluth, S. S. & A. Ry. (Wis.) 904. § 2. Carriage of passengers. In an action for ejecting a person from a railway train, a waiver of a defense that the ticket presented was, by its terms, good only on the date of sale, must be pleaded.-Trezona v. Chicago G. W. Ry. Co. (Iowa) 486. There can be no recovery for the ejection from a train of one who presented an expired limited ticket, the limit of which had not been waived, and who refused to pay fare; such person being a trespasser.-Trezona v. Chicago G. W. Ry. Co. (Iowa) 486. The purchaser of a railroad ticket who does not use it during its life, is not, as a matter of law, entitled to recover its value.-Trezona v. Chicago G. W. Ry. Co (Iowa) 486. CHANGE OF VENUE. A first-class ticket, marked "Not good after - date of sale," does not entitle the purchaser to passage over the railroad issuing it a year after Of civil action, see "Venue," § 3. its date. Trezona v. Chicago G. W. Ry. Co. - (Iowa) 486. CHARACTER. Evidence in action for threatening to expel Of witness, see "Witnesses," § 4. passenger from train for illegal use of mileage ticket construed, and held a question for the jury whether the passenger or a ticket scalper owned the ticket.-Mueller v. Chicago, B. & N. Ry. Co. (Minn.) 566. Where a passenger owned a mileage ticket, and a scalper with whom she left it to take care of the same unlawfully used it, held, that the ticket was not forfeited.-Mueller v. Chicago, B. & N. Ry. Co. (Minn.) 566. Damages awarded for threatening to put passenger off a train and compelling her to pay fare held excessive. Mueller v. Chicago, B. & N. Ry. Co. (Minn.) 566. Carrier held liable in damages for expelling intoxicated passenger from station on a stormy night, whereby he died from exposure.-Haug v. Great Northern Ry. Co. (N. D.) 97. See "Animals." CATTLE. CAUSA MORTIS. See "Gifts," § 1 CAUSE OF ACTION. See "Action." CERTIFICATE. As evidence, see "Evidence," § 10. CHARGE. By carrier, see "Carriers," § 1. Of legacies on property by will, see "Wills," § 5. CHATTEL MORTGAGES. See, also, "Guaranty," § 3. § 1. Requisites and validity. A chattel mortgage held to have been for a valuable consideration. Case (Iowa) 483. McGillivray v. Where a chattel mortgage was signed and delivered in good faith, but not acknowledged, mortgagee's subsequent knowledge regarding the mortgagor's assignment for creditors next day could not affect its validity.-In re Windhorst (Iowa) 513. Finding that a bill of sale and agreement reserving right of redemption was a valid mortgage held sustained by evidence.-Dyson v. Johnson (Minn.) 236. Chattel mortgage describing the chattels as contained in a certain building, in which they were thereafter placed, held not invalid because of the misdescription.-Arlington Mill & Elevator Co. v. Yates (Neb.) 677. Under Comp. Laws, § 4384, requiring chattel mortgages to be witnessed, and section 5260, providing that interest shall not affect a witness' competency, the mortgagee may sign as Of record for purpose of review, see "Appeal a witness.-Fisher v. Porter (S. D.) 112. and Error," § 12. CERTIORARI. § 2. Filing, recording, and registration. The statute under which a chattel mortgage ceases to be valid after five years from the filing thereof protects only creditors, purchasers, Review of proceedings before justices of the and mortgagees whose rights accrued after five peace, see "Justices of the Peace," § 3. § 1. Nature and grounds. In view of Code, § 4154, held, that a writ cannot be granted when the error can be corrected by appeal.-Oyster v. Bank (Iowa) 523. Common-law certiorari will not issue where a party has an adequate remedy by appeal.State v. Oshkosh, A. & B. W. R. Co. (Wis.) 193. The only question which can be considered on certiorari to the circuit court is that court's jurisdiction.-State v. Circuit Court for Outagamie County (Wis.) 745. § 2. Proceedings and determination. Objections to the jurisdiction of a lower court in mandamus proceedings cannot be considered when made for the first time in the supreme court on certiorari.-Bigelow v. Brooks (Mich.) 810. Where a full return is made to a writ of certiorari, and no motion offered to supersede or to quash, no order but one of affirmance can be made.-State v. Circuit Court for Outagamie County (Wis.) 745. CHALLENGE. To juror, see "Jury," § 3. years. Arlington Mill & Elevator Co. v. Yates (Neb.) 677. § 3. Construction and operation. A chattel mortgage does not convey title to the mortgagee until he takes steps to enforce it. -Wineman V. (Mich.) 245. Fisher Electrical Mfg. Co. Where debt represented by note remains due, a chattel mortgage securing it will not be affected by renewal of the note.-Arlington Mill & Elevator Co. v. Yates (Neb.) 677. note may be shown to be one of indemnity.A mortgage to secure a debt evidenced by a Honaker v. Vesey (Neb.) 1100. Failure to make sale within 20 days after mortgagee takes possession, under Laws 1889, c. 26, does not discharge mortgage lien.-Pitts Agricultural Works v. Baker (S. D.) 586. § 4. Rights and liabilities of parties. brought by second mortgagee against mortgaWhere action of claim and delivery was gor, the latter cannot show a prior outstanding being no evidence that the first mortgagor ever chattel mortgage on the same property, there demanded possession.-James v. Wilson (N. D.) 603. § 5. Rights and remedies of creditors. Creditors cannot object to a mortgage covering exempt property because not signed by the wife, as required by Rev. St. 1898, § 2313.Cunningham v. Rodby (Wis.) 740. § 6. Assignment of mortgage or debt. Assignee of note takes no interest in chattel mortgage securing it, where payee had previously parted with all interest in it.-Waller v. Staples (Iowa) 570. CITIZENS. Equal protection of laws, see "Constitutional CIVIL DAMAGE LAWS. § 7. Removal or transfer of property by See "Intoxicating Liquors," § 6. mortgagor. CIVIL RIGHTS. A mortgagee held not to have lost his lien by delivery of the mortgaged property to an assignee of the mortgagor on the assignee's agree- See, also, "Constitutional Law," §§ 3, 7. ment to pay the mortgage.-In re Windhorst (Iowa) 513. Saloon held not within Gen. Laws 1885, c. Where a chattel mortgagor makes an assign-224, as amended by Gen. Laws 1897, c. 349. rement for the benefit of creditors, the mortgagee lating to exclusion of colored people from planeed not file his claim with the assignee to main-ces of refreshments.-Rhone v. Loomis (Minn.) tain his rights under the mortgage.-In re Windhorst (Iowa) 513. 31. CLAIM AND DELIVERY. Where one buying chattels knew that they were mortgaged, he is charged with notice, al- See "Replevin." though the mortgage was not witnessed, so as to impart notice, as required by Comp. Laws, § 4384.-Fisher v. Porter (S. D.) 112. Questions whether subsequent purchasers knew that the chattels were mortgaged, and whether the description would enal le third persons to identify them, were for the jury.-Fisher v. Porter (S. D.) 112. The question whether subsequent purchasers of mortgaged chattels had actual notice of a mortgage was for the jury.-Fisher v. Porter (S. D.) 112. A chattel mortgagee is not entitled to expenses of an unnecessary trip to foreclose the mortgage. -In re Windhorst (Iowa) 513. Chattel mortgage is not barred because original note which it was given to secure is barred, where the note was kept alive by renewals.Arlington Mill & Elevator Co. v. Yates (Neb.) 677. An indemnity mortgage cannot be foreclosed by original mortgagee until damages have been suffered for which the indemnity was given.Honaker v. Vesey (Neb.) 1100. Capacity of plaintiff mortgagee to sue to recover of mortgagor the mortgaged chattels cannot be questioned by interveners seeking to recover of plaintiff for conversion.-Pitts Agricultural Works v. Baker (S. D.) 586. See "Property." CHATTELS. CHEAT. See "False Pretenses." CHECKS. Effect of check as transfer of deposit, see "Banks and Banking," § 2. CHILD. See "Adoption"; "Bastards"; "Guardian and CHOSE IN ACTION. Assignment, see "Assignments." CITATION. See "Process." CITIES. See "Municipal Corporations." COMMON CARRIERS. See "Carriers." COMMON LAW. So much of the common law as is applicable COMMON SCHOOLS. See "Schools and School Districts," § 1. COMPARATIVE NEGLIGENCE. See "Negligence," § 2. COMPENSATION. Of attorney, see "Attorney and Client," § 2. Of receiver, see "Receivers," § 7. COMPETENCY. Of experts as witnesses, see "Evidence," § 12. COMPLAINT. In civil actions, see "Pleading," § 1. In criminal prosecution, see "Indictment and In- COMPROMISE AND SETTLEMENT. A settlement of an action for personal in- In settling an action for personal injuries, A settlement of a pending action is not fraudu- A settlement of an action between plaintiff Evidence held insufficient to show matters of COMPUTATION. Of time, see "Time." CONCLUSION. Of witness, see "Evidence," § 12. CONDEMNATION. 3. Personal and civil rights. Use of "Readings from the Bible" in public Use of "Readings from the Bible" in public Taking property for public use, see "Eminent money for benefit of any religious sect.-Pfeiff- CONDITIONAL SALES. See "Sales," § 7. 77 N.W.-72 er v. Board of Education of City of Detroit Use of "Readings from the Bible" in public |