Page images

Of bank, see "Banks and Banking," § 1.
Of corporation, see "Corporations," § 5.
Of fraudulent grantor, see "Fraudulent Con-
veyances," § 1.

§ 1. Proceedings for declaration of insolvency.

In proceedings under Laws 1897, c. 334, costs incurred after conveyance complained of cannot be included to confer jurisdiction.-Woodard & Stone Co. v. Milnes (Wis.) 163.

In proceedings under Laws 1897, c. 334, costs incurred prior to conveyance complained of may be included to confer jurisdiction.-Woodard & Stone Co. v. Milnes (Wis.) 163.

§ 2. Assignment, administration, and distribution of insolvent's estate. A debtor may prefer creditors.-Blair State Bank v. Stewart (Neb.) 370.

One asserting preference against insolvent estate must show that the estate has been increased by misappropriation of trust funds belonging to him.-Morrison v. Lincoln Savings Bank & Safe-Deposit Co. (Neb.) 655.


In civil actions, see "Trial," § 5.

its behalf.-Gore v. Canada Life Assur. Co. (Mich.) 650.

Whether an agent for an insurance company is entitled to commission only when he presents an acceptable application depends on his contract with the company.-Gore v. Canada Life Assur. Co. (Mich.) 650.

§ 4. The contract in general.

Policy issued by a mutual insurance company to one not a member held in violation of Code 1873, § 1160, and therefore void. In re Mutual Guaranty Fire Ins. Co. (Iowa), 868; Alvord v. Barker, Id.

A mutual insurance company, insuring property of one not a member for a specific premium, in violation of Code 1873, § 1160, held not estopped from pleading ultra vires as a defense to an action on the policy. In re Mutual Guaranty Fire Ins. Co. (Iowa) 868; Alvord v. Barker, Id.

Evidence held not to establish a contract of

insurance.-Taylor v. State Ins. Co. (Iowa) 1032. § 5. Premiums, dues, and assessments.

Where policy holder in mutual insurance company contracts to pay a sum by installments on assessments made by directors, the statute does not begin to run until an assessment is made.-Langworthy v. Garding (Minn.) 207.

In criminal prosecutions, see "Criminal Law," § 6. Cancellation, surrender, abandon86; "Homicide," § 4.


§ 1. Control and regulation in general. A foreign accident insurance company must pay the annual license fee imposed by Rev. St. 1878, § 1220, in addition to the fee of 2 per cent. on its income, imposed by Laws 1880, c. 105.-State v. Fricke (Wis.) 732.

Mandamus will not lie to compel insurance commissioner to issue a license to a foreign accident insurance company, which has failed to pay annual license fees for previous years, though limitations would preclude a recovery thereof.-State v. Fricke (Wis.) 732.

A plate-glass insurance company transacts the business of "accidental insurance," within Rev. St. 1878, c. 1220, requiring such a company to pay an annual fee.-State v. Fricke (Wis.) 734. § 2. Insurance companies.

Members of mutual insurance company held not liable as partners on a policy issued by its officers to one not a member, in violation of Code 1873, § 1160.-In re Mutual Guaranty Fire Ins. Co. (Iowa) 868; Alvord v. Barker, Id.

One insuring his property in a mutual company in a stated amount, and for a specific premium, does not thereby become a member.-In re Mutual Guaranty Fire Ins. Co. (Iowa) 868; Alvord v. Barker, Id.

Creation of a guaranty fund, consisting of shares issued to subscribers by a mutual insurance company, does not make it a stock company. In re Mutual Guaranty Fire Ins. Co. (Iowa) 868; Alvord v. Barker, Id.

Assessment in another state on winding up

domestic mutual insurance corporation, until set aside, held conclusive evidence of such an assessment in the state.-Langworthy v. Garding (Minn.) 207.

§ 3. Insurance agents and brokers.

A manager of the Michigan branch of a Canadian life insurance company held not presumptively authorized to bind the company by appointing agents and making contracts with them in its behalf.—Gore v. Canada Life Assur. Co. (Mich.) 650.

An inspector or superintendent of agencies for a life insurance company is not presumed to have authority to bind the company by appointing agents and making contracts with them on

ment, or rescission of policy.

A party does not lose his right to rescind for fraud because the contract has been partly performed and the parties cannot be placed in statu quo.-McCarty v. New York Life Ins. Co. (Minn.) 426.

Whether insured lost his right of rescission by negligence and delay in not sooner discovering fraudulent representations of the agent. held for the jury.-McCarty v. New York Life Ins. Co. (Minn.) 426.

The fact that insured was negligent in relying on fraudulent representations of the agent held no defense to an action for rescission.— McCarty v. New York Life Ins. Co. (Minn.) 426.

Question whether an agent made false representations held for the jury.-McCarty v. New York Life Ins. Co. (Minn.) 426.

Fraudulent representations of an agent held ground for rescission, though the policy provided that no statements made by him should bind the company.-McCarty v. New York Life Ins. Co. (Minn.) 426.

§ 7.

Avoidance of policy for misrepre

sentation, fraud, or breach of warranty or condition.

A condition requiring insured to state if his interest in premises is less than absolute, held not violated, the naked legal title only being outstanding.-McCoy v. Iowa State Ins. Co. (Iowa) 529.

An answer in an application that a bar owned by the applicant was tended by applicant's clerk exclusively is untrue, if applicant occasionally went behind the bar to temporarily wait on cusLife Soc. (Mich.) 690. tomers.-Malicki v. Chicago Guaranty Fund

An answer in an application held to mean that insured did not drink any spirituous_liquors.-Malicki v. Chicago Guaranty Fund Life Soc. (Mich.) 690.

A warranty of insured that the property was incumbered for $350, held a material concealment, it being mortgaged for $500.-Niles v. Farmers' Mut. Fire Ins. Co. of Grand Traverse, Antrim, and Leleenau Counties (Mich.) 933.

In action on life insurance policy, held error to rule that a fraternal association issuing certificates entitling beneficiary to receive money on death of member was not an association, within the meaning of question in application

as to whether life association had refused policy to applicant.-Bruce v. Connecticut Mut. Life Ins. Co. (Minn.) 210.

In action on life policy, held error to reject evidence tending to show that applicant had sought opinion of medical examiner of benefit association as to whether he was insurable.Bruce v. Connecticut Mut. Life Ins. Co. (Minn.) 210.

Rights of mortgagee under insurance policy held not affected by alleged misrepresentations of mortgagor as to title.-Liverpool & London & Globe Ins. Co. v. Davis (Neb.) 66.

§ 8. Forfeiture of policy for breach of promissory warranty, covenant, or condition subsequent. Contract for sale of lands held not sufficient change of title or ownership to avoid policy.Pringle v. Des Moines Ins. Co. (Iowa) 521.

That exposures added to a transferred risk were the same, substantially, as those of the original risk, held immaterial.-McCoy v. Iowa State Ins. Co. (Iowa) 529.

Issuance of a policy after a loss, suit on it, and compromise, held not to estop insured to deny existence of the contract in an action on another policy forbidding other insurance.-Taylor v. State Ins. Co. (Iowa) 1032.

Insurance policy construed, and held that, on failure of insured to pay his premium note at maturity, the policy was forfeited, unless such ground of forfeiture was waived.-Banholzer v. New York Life Ins. Co. (Minn.) 295.

Evidence held to show that, notice prior to time when annual premium was due having been given, the insurer was not required to give any other notice.-Banholzer v. New York Life Ins. Co. (Minn.) 295.

cept in a certain manner prevents the waiver of the sufficiency of proofs of loss in any other manner, where the record does not show that the

policy contains any stipulations as to the form or contents of proofs of loss.-Pringle v. Des Moines Ins. Co. (Iowa) 521.

Refusal of insured to submit to an examination under oath and defects in proofs of loss, held waived by negotiations. for a settlement.-Wicking v. Citizens' Mut. Fire Ins. Co. (Mich.) 275.

Evidence held to establish a waiver of conditions contained in the policy.-Cronin v. Fire Ass'n of Philadelphia (Mich.) 648.

Insurer held estopped by its conduct to claim forfeiture as against mortgagee.-Granger v. Manchester Fire Assur. Co. (Mich.) 693.

The defense of forfeiture on account of a breach of the conditions in a policy may be waived.-First Baptist Church of Jackson v. Citizens' Mut. Fire Ins. Co. (Mich.) 702.

That premises were vacant when insured, to knowledge of agent, is a waiver of provision against vacancy.-German Ins. Co. v. Frederick (Neb.) 1106.

Under terms of standard fire policy, held that an agent's knowledge of the construction of a building avoiding the policy by the express terms thereof, and failure to object, is not a waiver of the condition of forfeiture.Straker v. Phoenix Ins. Co. of Brooklyn, N. Y. (Wis.) 752.

§ 10. Risks and causes of loss.

Where evidence conclusively shows that injuries were not received by insured while defending herself from assaults of burglars. thieves, or pickpockets, as provided by an accident policy, but were inflicted for the purEvidence held insufficient to show waiver of pose of accomplishing her death, the insurforfeiture of policy for nonpayment of premi-ance company is not liable.-Ging v. Travelers' ums.-Banholzer v. New York Life Ins. Co. Ins. Co. (Minn.) 291. (Minn.) 295.

[blocks in formation]

Under the terms of a standard fire insurance policy, held, the subsequent erection of a building next to that insured forfeits the policy if known to insured, though he did not own or have control over it, nor the land on which it was situated.-Straker v. Phoenix Ins. Co. of Brooklyn, N. Y. (Wis.) 752.

A continuing warranty that there is no exposure within a certain distance held equivalent to an express stipulation that the nonexposure was material to the risk, and should continue

§ 11. Notice and proof of loss. Proofs of loss are not objectionable, as failing to show that insured was the sole owner of the property at the time of the fire, because they use the present tense.-Wicking v. Citizens' Mut. Fire Ins. Co. (Mich.) 275.

Where insurer's agents knew the location of a fire, it is immaterial that the proofs of loss did not locate it in detail.-Wicking v. Citizens' Mut. Fire Ins. Co. (Mich.) 275.

Proofs of loss sent in an envelope addressed to the insurer need not bear a formal address to it, or state accurately the addresses of the other insurers.-Wicking v. Citizens' Mut. Fire Ins. Co. (Mich.) 275.

§ 12. Adjustment of loss.

several companies jointly, held to be under the A submission to arbitration, though made by policies, and not at common law.-Wicking v. Citizens' Mut. Fire Ins. Co. (Mich.) 275. § 13. Right to proceeds.

A policy of life insurance is to be construed as of the date of its execution, to determine

during the life of the policy.-Straker v. Pho-who are the beneficiaries, though the amount nix Ins. Co. of Brooklyn, N. Y. (Wis.) 752.

The provision of a standard fire insurance policy that it should be void "if the hazard be increased by any means within the control or knowledge of the assured," refers to subsequent conditions, and not to conditions existing when it was issued.-Straker v. Phoenix Ins. Co. of Brooklyn, N. Y. (Wis.) 752.

9. Estoppel, waiver, or agreements affecting right to avoid or forfeit policy. Correspondence between assured and insurer held a waiver of technical proof of loss.-Pringle v. Des Moines Ins. Co. (Iowa) 521.

The court cannot hold that a provision of a policy that no stipulation can be changed ex

was reduced after some of them were dead.Voss v. Connecticut Mut. Life Ins. Co. (Mich.) 697.

insured, for the children, vests a defeasible inA policy for a wife, or, if she did not survive terest in them, which may descend to grandchildren.-Voss v. Connecticut Mut. Life Ins. Co. (Mich.) 697.

14. Payment or discharge, contribution, and subrogation. negligence of a railroad, the insured cannot reWhere insured property is destroyed by the lease the right of action which the insurer would have against the railroad, on making payment of the loss, without releasing the insurer.-Sims v. Mutual Fire Ins. Co. (Wis.) 908.

Where insured settles with a railroad for property destroyed by it, and releases it, he cannot, in an action on the policy, deny that the property was so destroyed.-Sims v. Mutual Fire Ins. Co. (Wis.) 908.

§ 15. Actions on policies.

Evidence held improperly submitted under the theory on which a case was tried.-McCoy v. Iowa State Ins. Co. (Iowa) 529.

A waiver of a condition of a policy against additional exposures without consent must, in an action on the policy, be pleaded.-McCoy v. Iowa State Ins. Co. (Iowa) 529.

INTERLOCUTORY JUDGMENT. Appealability, see "Appeal and Error," § 1. Review on appeal or writ of error, see "Appeal and Error," § 21.


Under Act Cong. June 13, 1898 (War Revenue Tax Law), held, that it is the duty of express companies to affix a stamp without requiring the shipper to pay therefor.-Attorney General v. American Exp. Co. (Mich.) 317.


Where a policy contains condition of forfeiture, it is error to refuse an instruction thereon where there is no evidence of waiver.-Cro- To jury, see "Trial," § 6. nin v. Fire Ass'n of Philadelphia (Mich.) 648.

The burden is on insurer to show the violation of conditions avoiding an otherwise valid


policy. Malicki v. Chicago Guaranty Fund In actions in general, see "Parties," § 2. Life Soc. (Mich.) 690.


Where adjuster agreed to pay mortgagee's loss, fixed at a certain sum, mortgagee can recover the sum fixed, where declaration con- See "Descent and Distribution." tains common counts.-Granger v. Manchester Fire Assur. Co. (Mich.) 693.

A declaration on a life policy by children of one only of two children of insured's wife, who in the event of her death were beneficiaries, held demurrable for want of parties.-Voss v. Connecticut Mut. Life Ins. Co. (Mich.) 697. In an action on a policy held proper to refuse to allow the answer to be amended, after the close of plaintiff's evidence, so as to plead a forfeiture. First Baptist Church of Jackson v. Citizens' Mut. Fire Ins. Co. (Mich.) 702.

A suit brought 60 days after the receipt of the proofs of loss held not premature under a standard policy issued by a mutual insurance company. First Baptist Church of Jackson v. Citizens' Mut. Fire Ins. Co. (Mich.) 702.

Clause in policy limiting right of action to a different time from that allowed by statute is void.-Omaha Fire Ins. Co. v. Drennan (Neb.)


Insured is not precluded from recovering because of misstatement in application written by the agent.-German Ins. Co. v. Frederick (Neb.) 1106.

§ 16. Mutual benefit insurance.

Notice of an assessment in a mutual insurance association held invalid, so that forfeiture of member's rights could not be based thereon. -Bridges v. National Union (Minn.) 411. Regulations of benefit society as to beneficiary will be liberally construed.-Fisher v. Donovan (Neb.) 778.

Member holding benefit insurance may change beneficiary in accordance with laws of society and its charter.-Fisher v. Donovan (Neb.) 778. A certificate in a benefit society gives the beneficiary no vested rights.-Fisher v. Donovan (Neb.) 778.

On death of member holding benefit certificate, the money vests absolutely in the designated beneficiary.-Fisher v. Donovan (Neb.) 778.


§ 1. Licenses and taxes.

Evidence held to show that several editions of a daily paper were distinct publications, so as to dispense with a publication of notice of application for a license in more than one of them.-Feil v. Kitchen Bros. Hotel Co. (Neb.)


Whether several editions of a daily paper are distinct publications, so as to dispense with publishing a notice of application for a license the license board.-Feil v. Kitchen Bros. Hotel in more than one of them, held a question for Co. (Neb.) 344.

One held a competent remonstrant against the granting of a license, although personally interested.-Feil v. Kitchen Bros. Hotel Co. (Neb.) 344.

The license board has no authority to desig of notice of application for license shall be nate the newspaper in which the publication made.-Feil v. Kitchen Bros. Hotel Co. (Neb.)


Requirements stated as to publishing notice of application for license.-Feil v. Kitchen Bros. Hotel Co. (Neb.) 344.

should be inserted in the newspaper having the Though notice of application for a license largest circulation, the publication is not invalid, in the absence of bad faith in the choice of the paper.-Feil v. Kitchen Bros. Hotel Co. (Neb.) 344.

§ 2. Regulations.

Under Gen. St. 1894, § 2012, hotels are excepted from provision requiring places where liquors are sold to be closed during certain hours, but not from provision prohibiting sale of liquors during such time.-State v. Eckert (Minn.) 294.

Instruction that if defendant kept his place of business open, "or" sold liquors during certain hours, he was guilty under indictment for illeCreditors have no interest in a benefit certifi-gally selling liquors, held error.-State v. Eckert (Minn.) 294.

cate before or after death of member.-Fisher v. Donovan (Neb.) 778.


§ 3. Offenses.

Opening a saloon to prepare for business Monday held a violation of Laws 25th Gen. Assem, c. 62.-Rosenthal v. Hobson (Iowa) 488.

Fraudulent, see "Fraudulent Conveyances," § 1. § 4. Criminal prosecutions.


See "Usury."

A former conviction held no defense to a subsequent trial for contempt in violating an injunction against selling liquors by acts after the first conviction.-Rosenthal v. Hobson (Iowa)


A charge that the law prohibits sale of liquor to be used as a beverage, or to be drank on the premises, held not to authorize conviction of the latter offense, accused being charged with the former only, which the court stated fully.-People v. Hilliard (Mich.) 306.

Evidence held to sustain verdict of guilty of illegal sale.-State v. Walterstradt (Minn.) 48. On trial for selling liquors to a minor, where the evidence shows sale by another supposed to be servant of defendant, evidence of sale by defendant on another occasion to a minor was inadmissible.-State v. Austin (Minn.) 301. A justice of the peace has no jurisdiction to try one charged with selling intoxicating liquors. In re Chenoweth (Neb.) 63.

5. Injunction.

§ 1. Nature and essentials in general. Order dismissing action for failure of proof considered, and held a judgment, though irregular in form.-Cameron v. Great Northern Ry. Co. (N. D.) 1016.

§ 2. By confession.

A judgment against a firm on confession by one partner held not subject to collateral attack, as not binding on all the partners for lack of their consent.-Belcher v. Curtis (Mich.) 310. § 3. By default.

Sufficiency of defense cannot properly be determined on motion to open default judgment.G. S. Congdon Hardware Co. v. Consolidated Apex Min. Co. (S. D.) 1022.

Evidence held to show an abuse of discretion

Under Code, § 2405, where a continuance of in the court's failure to open a default judgment. an application for injunction against liquor sell-G. S. Congdon Hardware Co. v. Consolidated ing is had because of defendant's election to Apex Min. Co. (S. D.) 1022. take testimony by deposition, a temporary injunction does not issue as a matter of right. Powers v. Winters (Iowa) 509.

[blocks in formation]

See "Courts"; "Justices of the Peace."
Mandamus to judge, see "Mandamus," § 1.

1. Special or substitute judges. When further proceedings are had before a -different judge, he is not bound by the rulings of the former judge.-Seery v. Murray (Iowa) 1058.

A change of judge, after a trial begun in a -district court, is unauthorized as to material matters.-Rossman v. Moffett (Minn.) 960. § 2. Powers.

A district judge cannot render a money judgment in vacation.-Gamble v. Buffalo County (Neb.) 341.


Decisions of courts in general, see "Courts." $ 2. Enforcement by creditors' suit, see "Creditors' Suit."

Review, see "Appeal and Error."

Sales under judgment, see "Judicial Sales."

In particular civil actions or proceedings.
See "Divorce," § 6; "Replevin." § 6.
Decree in equity, see "Equity," $3.
Foreclosure, see "Mortgages." $§ 9-19.

Personal judgment for deficiency on foreclosure, see "Mortgages," §§ 9-19.

Imposition of terms held not a condition precedent to the vacation of a judgment by default at the same term at which it was entered.-Boutin v. Catlin (Wis.) 910.

Evidence held not to show that a court abused its discretion in setting aside a judgment by default.-Boutin v. Catlin (Wis.) 910.

Terms imposed on vacating a judgment by default held just, within Rev. St. 1898, § 2832. though not requiring payment of costs.-Boutin v. Catlin (Wis.) 910.

§ 4. On trial of issues.

Objection that a claim was not presented to the board of school directors before suing thereon as required by Code, § 2780, held available by motion in arrest, under Code, § 3563, as showing no right whatever to relief.-Pierson v. Independent School Dist. of Hawarden (Iowa) 494.

In an action on a saloon keeper's bond no greater judgment can be rendered against the principal than against the sureties.-Lafler v. Monroe Circuit Judge (Mich.) 265.

Motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict should be denied where it does not clearly appear that the cause of action to be established would not, in point of substance, constitute a legal cause of action, and that defects could not be supplied at another trial.-Cruikshank v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co. (Minn.) 958. § 5. Entry, record, and docketing.

The fact that there is no word or dollar mark attached to the figures in the columns for "costs" and "amount of judgment" in the judgment docket entry, creates no inference that it is not a money judgment.-Therme v. Bethenoid (Iowa) 497.

Under Code § 273, held, that when a transcript of a superior court judgment is filed in the district court, the superior court cannot retain jurisdiction of one it has appointed to collect notes on which it has decreed a lien, or of the property in his possession.-Oyster v. Bank (Iowa) 523.

§ 6. Correction in same court.

Code 1873, § 179, relating to correction of evident mistakes in judgments, held not to apply to a mistake, it having been one of law.Manning v. Nelson (Iowa) 503.

§ 7. Opening or vacating.

A judgment held not to have been irregularly entered, so as to invoke Code 1873, § 3154, relating to the vacation of irregular judgments after term.-Manning v. Nelson (Iowa) 503.

A motion to vacate a judgment two years after term held too late, under Code 1873, § 3156. -Manning v. Nelson (Iowa) 503.

§ 8. Equitable relief.

That judgment debtor mistook the law, and suffered judgment, held not a mistake entitling

him to enjoin enforcement thereof.-City of Broken Bow v. Broken Bow Waterworks Co. (Neb.) 1078.

To justify injunction to restrain enforcement of judgment, it must be shown that debtor was prevented from interposing valid defense by fraud or accident without his fault.-City of Broken Bow v. Broken Bow Waterworks Co. (Neb.) 1078.

Pleading and proof held insufficient to warrant injunction restraining enforcement of judgment. -City of Broken Bow v. Broken Bow Waterworks Co. (Neb.) 1078.

§ 9. Collateral attack.

Finding that affidavit of an appearance or answer by defendant was filed before entry of judgment held sustained by evidence.-Cunningham v. Water-Power Sandstone Co. (Minn.) 137.

It is immaterial that note was not filed with clerk when judgment for default was entered thereon.-West Duluth Land Co. v. Bradley (Minn.) 964.

Const. U. S. art. 4, § 1. held to prevent the collateral attack of a judgment of a county court having jurisdiction, in a state other than that in which it was rendered.-Anderson v. Chicago Title & Trust Co. (Wis.) 710.

§ 10. Merger and bar of causes of action and defenses.

Under Code 1873, § 2654, held, that a judgment sustaining a demurrer to a petition, which plaintiff failed to amend, constitutes a final adjudication, which bars another action.-Gregory v. Woodworth (Iowa) 837.

A former judgment on a note is not a bar, where it was void for want of jurisdiction over defendant.-Sackett v. Montgomery (Neb.) 1083. § 11. Conclusiveness of adjudication. A judgment in probate declaring valid mortgages held by the decedent against a legatee held res judicata in a suit to foreclose them.-Prouty v. Matheson (Iowa) 1039.

Decree in foreclosure of land contract,. holding one defendant personally liable, is conclusive in petition for execution for deficiency.Ward v. Obenauer (Mich.) 305.

Judgment and roll in former action between the parties held competent to establish estoppel

by verdict.-Lytle v. Chicago G. W. Ry. Co.

(Minn.) 975.

An absolute order of revivor of an action is conclusive of the right of the successor.-Missouri Pac. Ry. Co. v. Fox (Neb.) 130.

Where motion to discharge judgment as satisfied was overruled on application to revive the judgment, which had become dormant, the former adjudication was conclusive.-Broadwater v. Foxworthy (Neb.) 1103.

Where a judgment was recovered on a complaint claiming to state facts warranting a recovery of double rent under Rev. St. $ 2185, held the claim was unassailable in a collateral proceeding.-State v. Helms (Wis.) 194.

§ 12. Lien.

Where judgment is reversed on appeal, it thereupon ceases to be a lien on the debtor's land.-Oliver v. Lansing (Neb.) 802.

Where a person purchases land subject to judgment lien, he holds it discharged thereof where the judgment is reversed.-Oliver v. Lansing (Neb.) 802.

Where judgment lien is discharged by reversal of judgment, it is not revived from the date of the original judgment by rendition of another judgment.-Oliver v. Lansing (Neb.) 802.

A judgment is no lien on an equitable interest in realty.-Woolworth v. Parker (Neb.) 1090.


In civil actions, see "Evidence," § 1.


Of property of infant, see "Guardian and Ward," $ 1.

not entitled to afterwards dispute the priority A judgment creditor bidding in property held of a mortgage, though it was fraudulent as to him, where he led other bidders to believe that the sale was made subject to the mortgage.Belcher v. Curtis (Mich.) 310.

It will be presumed in absence of proof to the contrary that master making judicial sale took required oath.-Toscan v. Devries (Neb.) 669. On appeal from confirmation of judicial sale, defendant cannot complain that his interest was not appraised separately, where the appraisement was of the land less liens which would be deducted from such defendant's interest.Toscan v. Devries (Neb.) 669.

The validity of a judicial sale of the assets of a corporation cannot be collaterally impeached.-Anderson v. Chicago Title & Trust Co. (Wis.) 710.


Amount in controversy, see "Appeal and Er-
ror," § 1.
Effect of appearance, see "Appearance.”.
Jurisdiction of particular actions or proceedings.
See "Habeas Corpus," § 1; "Mandamus," § 2.
Special jurisdictions.

See "Equity," § 1.
Justices' courts in civil cases, see "Justices of
the Peace," § 1.
Particular courts, see "Courts."


See, also, "Grand Jury."

Custody and conduct, see "Trial.” § 6.
Disqualification or misconduct ground for new
trial, see "New Trial." § 2.
Instructions in civil actions, see “Trial,” § 5.

in criminal prosecutions, see "Criminal Questions for jury in civil actions, see "Trial,” Law," § 6.

$ 4.

Taking case or question from jury at trial, see "Trial," § 4.

§ 1. Right to trial by jury.

A violation of the Military Code is not a "criminal offense," within Bill of Rights, § 7, and therefore the offender is not entitled to a jury trial.-State v. Wagener (Minn.) 424.

Defendants in a mortgage foreclosure suit held not entitled to a jury to ascertain the rental value of premises of which they remained in possession under a supersedeas bond pending appeal.-Lowe v. Riley (Neb.) 758. § 2. Selection.

A plaintiff in a justice's court has no right to a trial by jurors not selected as prescribed by law.-Eldridge v. Hubbell (Mich.) 631.

§ 3. Challenges and objections.

Overruling challenge because juror sat in former trial involving reputation of the house accused lived in held not error, the juror denying prejudice.-People v. Williams (Mich.) 248.

A justice of the peace cannot allow a peremptory challenge of a juror.-Eldridge v. Hubbell (Mich.) 631.

Retention or rejection of a juror in the impaneling of a jury to whom an objection has

« PreviousContinue »