Damages for, see DAMAGES, 8, 9.
PERSONAL LIABILITY AND SE-
the husband of a portion of her interest in PERSONAL INJURIES. the profits which the husband would derive from the first partnership is valid; and the use by him, or by his copartner, of such profits to discharge a debt of the husband does not render his partner liable to the wife on account of having used her money for the purpose of paying her husband's Id.
5. Where a business owned by a married woman was conducted by her husband in his name, and a third person, in ignorance of the wife's interest, bought a half inter- est therein, and later, upon discovering the wife's interest, recognized her as a partner and offered to buy her share in the busi- ness, the wife became liable, upon an ac- counting as to the affairs of the partner- ship, for half of the purchase price of a machine previously bought by her husband and his partner before her relation to the business was discovered, although she had given her husband special instructions not to purchase the machine, it appearing that it was actually purchased and used in car- rying on the business of the partnership.
Partnership; relation a purely contract- ual one; subpartnership between one part- ner and his wife as to his share of the profits; liability of concealed partner for debts of firm; creation of partnership by agent without authority; ratification. 88 Good faith required of partners.
See CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, 2, VACY, 1.
An ophthalmologist who prefixes to his name the letters "Dr." on his sign, and on notices in which he undertakes to correct certain diseased conditions by the fitting of glasses to the eyes, comes within the terms of a statute providing, that, when a person shall append the title "Dr.," in a medical sense, to his name, he shall be regarded as practising medicine, within the meaning of the statute which requires a license as a condition precedent to doing so. State v. 504 Yegge (S. D.)
Publication of, without Consent, see FREEDOM OF SPEECH.
Publication of, as Part of Advertise- ment, as Violation of Right to Privacy, see PRIVACY, 4.
Error in Refusing Leave to Amend, see APPEAL AND ERROR, 10.
Mode of Testing Sufficiency of Answer, see APPEAL AND ERROR, 15. Time for objections; waiver.
1. Error in overruling a demurrer is not Discharge of partnership liability in in- available to defendant after a voluntary dividual bankruptcy proceedings. default and hearing in damages thereon, unless the complaint is bad in substance. Richards v. New York, N. H. & H. R. Co. (Conn.)
Effect on partnership debt of discharge in bankruptcy of individual partner; at- tempt to withdraw debts from jurisdiction of bankruptcy courts by attempted dissolu- tion; right of creditors of, to dividend where there is no joint estate and no sur- plus of separate estate after paying sep- arate debts; assignment, under insolvency laws, of one partner as dissolution of firm.
2. The right to move to strike para- graphs of answer is not waived by filing de-
murrers, where, after the demurrers are filed, the petition is amended, and the an- swer is then amended to meet the new mat- ter in the petition. Wisconsin Lumber Co. v. Greene & W. Teleph Co. (Iowa) 968 Sufficiency of plaintiff's pleadings.
Requiring Election between Different Theories, see TRIAL, 1.
Allegations as to Expulsion from Leg- islature, see LEGISLATURE, 5.
3. A complaint using language to de- scribe defendant's fault appropriate to both gross negligence and ordinary negligence, as if they occurred at one and the same time,
and that one included the other, is indef- inite and uncertain. Rideout v. Winnebago Traction Co. (Wis.) 601
4. A grantor who has reclaimed the prop- erty because of breach of certain conditions
subsequent, which the conveyance stip | PREMIUM NOTE.
ulated should cause the title to revert to him, need not, when invoking judicial rem- edies in respect thereto, plead the eviden- tiary facts showing title in him notwith- standing the paper title in the grantee, but may plead his title in general terms the same as if that title were dependent upon any other circumstances. Maginnis v. Knickerbocker Ice Co. (Wis.)
Failure to Allow Credit for, in Action on Policy, see APPEAL AND ERROR. 19.
Waiver of Provision for Termination of Policy, by Nonpayment of, see INSURANCE, 6.
To Building and Loan Association, see BUILDING AND LOAN Associ- ATIONS, 2.
PLEDGE AND COLLATERAL SE- agent's powers; liability of one doing busi- CURITY. ness through agent for acts and omissions of latter. 667
Pledge; right to sell collaterals governed by terms of contract; when purchaser has valid title to pledged property.
In Highway, see HIGHWAYS, 2.
1. The right of privacy is embraced Playing Pool as Betting, see GAMING. within the absolute rights of personal se- curity and personal liberty. Pavesich v. New England L. Ins. Co. (Ga.)
Contract by Mail, see CONFLICT OF LAWS, 2.
Offering of, in School, see SCHOOLS, 1, 2.
2. Liberty of speech and of the press, when exercised within the bounds of the constitutional guaranties, are limitations upon the exercise of the right of privacy.
3. The publication of a picture of a per- | Of personal injury. son, without his consent, as a part of an 2. The proximate cause of the accident advertisement, for the purpose of exploit- ing the publisher's business, is a violation of the right of privacy of the person whose picture is reproduced, and entitles him to recover, without proof of special damage.
4. One who seeks or holds a public office, or any person who claims from the public approval or patronage, waives his right of privacy to such an extent that he cannot restrain or impede the public in any proper investigation into the conduct of his pri- vate life which may throw light upon the question of his fitness for the office which he seeks or holds, or as to whether the pub- lic should bestow upon him the office which he seeks, or accord to him the approval or patronage which he asks. Id.
5. The right of privacy may be waived, either expressiy or by implication, except as to those matters which law or public policy demands shall be kept private; but a waiver authorizes an invasion of the right only to such an extent as is neces- sarily to be inferred from the purpose for which the waiver is made. Waiver for one purpose, and in favor of one person or class, does not authorize an invasion for all purposes, or by all persons and classes.
was the striking of the horse by the boy, where a farmer left a team of eleven-year- old horses drawing a wagon loaded with about a ton's weight, fastened to a hitching rail in front of a store while engaged in un- loading his wagon, as he had been frequent- ly in the habit of doing, and while the team was standing quietly a boy, in turning over the hitching rail near the head of the team, struck one of them on the nose, which frightened the team, causing them to break the halter, which was apparently in good condition, and run away, causing damage. 246 Stephenson v. Corder (Kan.)
3. The proximate cause of the injury of a servant by the fall of a derrick because of the breaking of a spliced rope is not the failure to insert thimbles into the loops of the splice, but the failure to inspect the rope for the purpose of determining its con- dition, and to repair it after it has become chafed and worn by use, where there is nothing to show that the splice is not suf- ficiently strong, without the thimbles, to do the work required of it, but fails because Rinci- of the wear due to continued use. cotti v. John J. O'Brien Contracting Co. (Conn.) 936
Proximate cause; of injury; what consti-
Of accident; what constitutes.
To Stay Inferior Court, see COURTS, 7.
PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS. See DRAINS AND SEWERS.
A property right in price quotations Public improvements; validity of assess- gathered by a board of trade is not de- ment for construction or cleaning of sew- stroyed by the facts that a large percent-ers; giving resident landowners on line of age of the business done under its auspices consists of gambling transactions, or that the news is susceptible of bad, as well as good, uses. Board of Trade v. L. A. Kin- sey Co. (C. C. App. 7th C.)
PROVABLE CLAIMS.
See BANKRUPTCY, 3.
1. The negligence of a carrier in failing to forward promptly goods delivered for transportation is the proximate cause of their loss, where, because of such delay, they are overtaken in transit and destroyed by an act of God, even though the act of God cannot reasonably be anticipated. Bibb Broom Corn Co. v. Atchison, T. & S. F. R. Co. (Minn.)
Duty to care for trespasser injured on track; in absence of negligence by railroad employees; duty of employees to extinguish fire found on right of way.
Duty to avoid injury to persons in help less position on track.
For Water; Burden of Showing Un- reasonableness of, see EVIDENCE, 6. For Water, see WATERS, 3-5.
REAL PROPERTY.
Power of Court in Other State over, see COURTS, 3.
Rule in Shelley's Case.
1. The rule in Shelley's Case is part of the common law of Iowa. Doyle v. Andis (lowa)
2. A fee simple is vested in the first taker under the rule in Shelley's Case by a conveyance to one "during his natural life, and then to his heirs."
Conditions subsequent; forfeiture.
Sufficiency of Allegations as to, see PLEADING, 4.
3. The beneficiary of a condition in a conveyance of property, for the breach of which the title thereto may revert to him, may lose the benefit thereof by conduct ren- dering it inequitable for him to insist upon the forfeiture as stipulated. Maginnis v. Knickerbocker Ice Co. (Wis.)
4. Mere silence will not operate as a waiver of the benefit of a condition, in case of an intentional breach thereof, though the conditional grantee incur expense which would operate to his prejudice if the grant- or were thereafter permitted to insist upon the forfeiture. Id.
5. Mere silence is not sufficient to waive a forfeiture because of breach of a condition 514 the grantor, and conduct in good faith re- in a conveyance of property; but silence by lying thereon by the grantee, whereby he is placed in such a situation that he will be greatly damaged if the apparent attitude of Validity of statute making railroad com- his conditional grantor be changed effective- panies liable for injury to employees by su-ly, will bind such grantor as a waiver of perior servants; scope of; liability of re- the benefit of the condition. ceiver for injury to employee.
Duty to look and listen before crossing track; negligence in walking on track.
Binding effect on, of condition subsequent in deed to; exercise of eminent domain to establish private railroad. 843
What constitutes, a "railroad" within meaning of act making railroad corporation
6. Equity will not prevent forfeiture of an estate for breach of a condition subse- quent, where the performance of the con- dition was made of the very essence of the contract, and the damages for the breach cannot be measured in money, while the fail-
In Appellate Court, see APPEAL AND ERROR, 1-6.
Of Prior Conviction; Admissibility of, see EVIDENCE, 11.
By Grantor to Enforce Forfeiture, see REAL PROPERTY, 7.
7. Re-entry by a grantor for the purpose of enforcing a forfeiture of the property for breach of certain conditions subsequent, which the conveyance stipulated should cause title to revert to the grantor, or the doing of something equivalent thereto for the purpose of reclaiming the property pur- suant to the terms of the conveyance, REGISTRATION. causes the title to revest in the grantor as absolutely as if no conveyance had been made, in the absence of any equity prevent- ing the legal effect of such acts. Id.
8. If a railway corporation takes posses- sion of land for a private purpose, its right to do so resting in a grant by the owner thereof, and it subsequently loses that right by forfeiture to such owner, it cannot thereafter defy such owner, and con- tinue to enjoy his property, because it might successfully proceed in good faith to acquire it for a public purpose.
Of Automobiles, see AUTOMOBILES, 2.
Niece of Man's Former Wife as, see INSURANCE, 4.
Invalidity of Agreement for Release of Employer by Accepting Benefits from Railroad Relief Fund, see MASTER AND SERVANT, 24. Question for Jury as to, see TRIAL, 4. NOTES AND BRIEFS.
Release; of liability for tort. RELIGIOUS SOCIETIES.
Real property; conversion of estates tail into fee-simple estates by statute. 370 1. A religious corporation is not bound Necessity that "way" be created by deed by the act of its minister in making use of or other writing; right of way as interest the membership roll of a former corpo- in lands. 568 ration, the title to whose property it ac- 786 quired through a foreclosure sale, so as to make such act significant upon the ques- tion of the identity of the two corporations. Allen v. North Des Moines M. E. Church (Iowa) 255 Rights of creditors of.
Freehold never in abeyance. What constitutes an encumbrance. 790 Rule in Shelley's Case; as part of com- mon law of Iowa; what comes within rule; rule as one of property, and not of con- struction; statute de donis. 953
2. In the absence of fraud, a creditor of a religious corporation has no right to en- force his claim against property formerly belonging to it after it has been sold on mortgage foreclosure, the corporation dis- solved, a new corporation organized out of. the old members and new ones, and the property bought from the purchaser at the foreclosure sale, although the new corpo- ration proceeds to carry on the work of the old one at the old location, and maintains the same relation as the old one to the gen- eral religious denomination.
A receiver of a Federal court in charge of a railroad company, who, by act Cong. March 3, 1887, chap. 373, corrected by act August 13, 1888, chap. 866, is required to manage and operate the property according to the requirements of the valid laws of the state in which it is situated, in the same 3. A creditor of a religious corporation manner as the owner or possessor thereof has no right of action against the individ- would be bound to do if in possession, isual members of it as such. subject to any rule prescribed by the state imposing on railroad corporations a liabil- ity for the negligence of employees having superior authority over other employees. Peirce v. Van Dusen (C. C. App. 6th C.)
Receivers; of railroad; liability for in- jury to employee. 706
« AnteriorContinuar » |