« PreviousContinue »
See, also, "Attachment;" "Execution;" "Writs." Formation of sanitary districts, see “Municipal
Enforcement of claim against firm, see “Part-
Corporations," 1, 2.
Matters first alleged in reply to gar-
Code 1887, 8 128, provides that “new Building across railroad right of way, see “Rail-
matter in the affidavit replying to the answer Dedication of, see “Dedication."
road Companies," 2.
of the garnishee," shall be taken as denied Defective streets, see “Municipal Corporations,"
without any rejoinder, and the matter shall be
tried as other issues of like nature.
in garnishment against a partner individually Occupation by railroad, see "Railroad Compa-
Held, that Election of road overseers, see "Counties," 3.
to secure a claim against the partnership, the
garnishee may raise on appeal the defense of
nonjoinder of the other partners, where the User and prescription.
partnership indebtedness was first alleged "in
1. Under Act March 31, 1876, § 52, de
the affidavit replying to the answer of the gar- claring that roads used as public roads for the
nishee." -Jones y. Langhorne, (Colo. Sup.) 34 P. five years preceding the passage of the act are
highways, the public user is the only thing to
be considered, without regard to the owner's
intention in permitting it.-Freshour v. Hihn,
(Cal.) 34 P. 87.
1. A gift of a check and certificate of de Establishment by statutory proceedings.
posit is established where the donor, being a
business man, after having expressed his inten-
2. An ordinance of a board of supervisors
tion to make the gift, indorses the check and directing their clerk to record a road as a high-
certificate, which he had left in the hands of way must specify the width of the highway,
the donor for safe-keeping, and redelivers them distance of a given line.-Freshour v. Hihn,
and not merely its direction by the course and
to the donee, who collects them, the donor nev. (Cal.) 34 P. 87.
er asking for them or their proceeds again. -
Field y. Shorb, (Cal.) 34 P. 504.
3. A public highway, legally established,
2. Gifts freely exchanged between compe-
ordered to be opened, and one-half of which at
tent parties, such as houseroom, pasture for a least was unobstructed, and used to some ex-
team, and use of a horse, cannot be made the tent for public travel, is not "unopened,” with-
subject of a claim or counterclaim in subse in the meaning of Gen. St. 1889, par. 5516.
quent litigation between them.-Bourke vacating all country roads which may have re-
Whiting, (Colo. Sup.) 34 P. 172.
mained "unopened" for seven years.--Webb v.
Board of Com’rs of Butler County, (Kan.) 34
Obstructions and encroachments.
Submission of questions to courts by governor 4. When a person constructs a ditch across
and legislature, see “Courts," 1.
a public highway, he is bound to restore the
highway at his own expense, by some reasona-
bly safe means of passage, and keep the same
in good repair, whether the ditch cuts the high-
Of water rights, see “Waters and Water way or street within or without the limits of a
city.- City of Lewiston v. Booth, (Idaho) 34 P.
5. Pol. Code, $8 2731, 2732, 2734, provide
that, if any highway "duly laid out and erect-
Of note, see "Negotiable Instruments,” 6.
ed" is encroached on, the overseer may require
the encroachment to be removed, by notice to
GUARDIAN AND WARD. the owner, specifying “the breadth of the high-
way," and the place and extent of the en-
croachment, and, if this is disregarded, he
Except as a matter of comity, in ex must sue to abate the nuisance, and, if suc-
ceptional cases, a guardian appointed in one cessful, may recover a penalty of $10 a day
state is not recognized as such in another. therefor. Held, that said penalty could not be
Gen. St. $ 2724, providing that letters of ad- recovered for encroachment on a highway by
ministration shall" issue to the guardian of a
user, never regularly laid out and recorded. -
minor, instead of to the minor hiinself, refers Freshour v. Hihn, (Cal.) 34 P. 87.
to a guardian appointed in the state, and not Encroachment by abutter Rights of
to one appointed in some other.-In re Nickals'
Estate, (Nev.) 34 P. 250.
6. The fact that an adjoining landowner,
over whose land one-half of a road was laid,
encroached upon the highway with a fence or
by cultivation and use, does not lessen the
Liability of petitioner for costs, see "Costs,” 5. right of the public to use the entire width of
the highway when increased travel makes it
Hearing and determination Questions necessary.-Webb F. Board of Com’rs of Butler
County, (Kan.) 34 P. 973.
Mere errors and irregularities in the pro- Pleading.
ceedings on a criminal trial are not reviewable
on habeas corpus, where the petitioner seeks feet wide, commencing at
7. A pleading described a highway as 40
discharge from a commitment under process is- named, and following the course and distance
sued on the final judgment of a court of compel of a given line "to the line of average high
tent jurisdiction.-In re Black. (Kan.) 34 P. tide to the bay of M." Held sufficient, the
line described being presumed to be the center
line, and not a side line, of the road, without
direct averment to that effect.-Freshour V.
See "Appeal," 86-88
Hihn, (Cal.) 34 P. 87.
Ownership of fee-Effect.
the heirs, she conveyed to him all her inte
8. The fact that houses on mortgaged lands est in testator's estate; that such instrz
have been removed into a public street on which
was a conveyance of her interest both as
the land abuts, and not beyond the center line tee and as widow or heir if the will recer
thereof, does not render their location still on
voked. Held not to bar her right to & polo
the land, on the ground that the owner of land homestead, as a widow's right to probaté bona
abutting on a street owns the land over which stead is not an interest in land, and consert
the street runs to the center line thereof, as he ly was not embraced in the conveyance-har
has no right to place his buildings in the street, Vance's Estate, (Cal.) 34 P. 1087.
and has no right as owner in anything in tran Extent.
sit over the street.-Stowell v. Waddingham, 8. Under Code Civil Proc. $ 1465,
(Cal.) 34 P. 436.
provides that, in case no homestead bas de
selected by a married man in his lifetime, the
court must select, set apart, and cause to be
recorded, a homestead for the use of the surtir
Enforcement of lien, see "Mechanics' Liens," 7. ing wife, the court may set apart one excel
$5,000 in value.-Smith v. Smith, (Cal) 3* P
Nature and extent of right.
1. Under Code Civil Proc. div. 1, § 322
9. Where the value of an estate is $85 a
exempting a homestead to be selected by the in excess of debts and expenses of administs
"owner, a partner is entitled, as against cred- tion, it is not an abuse of discretion to e
itors of the firm, to a homestead out of part- apart as a homestead to the surviving wife and
nership property.–Ferguson v. Speith, (Mont.) $10,000, which were occupied by deceasei
34 P. 1020.
Liabilities enforceable against.
his family in his lifetime, and which are inc-
visible.-Smith v. Smith, (Cal.) 34 P. 77.
2. The statutory provision that the home-
stead shall not be exempt from payment of a
Rights of widow and children.
debt contracted for its purchase, or for the erec 10. In ejectment by a widow, who had se
tion of improvements thereon, will not include her interest in community property, and by be
a debt created by borrowing money from a daughter, to get possession of their homesta:
third person, where there is no specific agree right, evidence was properly excluded that it
ment that the money is to be used in such pur-er the death of her husband the widos por
chase improvements. -- Dreese v. Myers, chased with her separate funds a lot in apot-
(Kan.) 34 P. 349.
er town, and resided there with her children
Rights of heirs.
and declared a homestead thereon, which it
3. Under Civil Code, $ 1265, providing that, was subsequently sold by her, before the ar
upon the death of one of the spouses, the home inured to her and her children as a joint rie
plication for a homestead herein, for such ric:
stead vests in the survivor if it had been se- which she could not individually waire.-Pbeas
lected from community property, the children
of homesteaders, upon the death of their fa- / v. Smith, (C:1.) 34 P. 667.
ther, acquire no interest by succession as his Setting apart.
heirs at law in a homestead so selected, and
hence no equity vests in them to redeem from it be set apart for the widow and ber to
11. The petition for a homestead asked that
the foreclosure of a mortgage on such home children, but the decree stated that the prop
stead.-Collins v. Scott, (Cal.) 34 P. 1085.
4. As under Civil Code, 1265, the title to of the family of said O., deceased." The
erty described “is hereby set apart for the use
a homestead selected from community property family of O. was shown by the record to bare
vests, on the death of one of the spouses, in consisted of the widow and two minor ebben
the survivor, the heirs of a deceased spouse are dren.
not necessary parties defendant to an action throughout the chapter
Held that, as the term "family" is used
to foreclose mortgage on the homestead, steads to denote the surviving husband or
oviding for bone
brought after the death of such spouse.-Collins and children, it must be regarded as used in
v. Scott, (Cal.) 34 P. 1085.
the decree in that sense, and as sufficiency
Rights of widow.
describing the widow and children.-Phelan F.
5. Under Gen. St. § 1397, empowering a Smith, (Cal.) 34 P. 667.
husband to dispose of his separate property by Conveyances.
will or otherwise, as though unmarried, Code
Proc. $ 972, providing that a widow shall be en-
12. The latter clause of Code Civil Proe
titled to remain in possession of the homestead. 1485, which defines the rights of successors by
and if the head of the family in his lifetime purchase to homesteads and to the right to
did not comply with the provisions for acquir. have homesteads set apart to them, relates
ing a homestead, she may do so, and shall on only to such purchasers as have succeeded to
such compliance be entitled to a homestead, and the rights of all, the persons entitled to a
the same shall be set aside for her use, does not homestead, but has no application where the
authorize the setting apart for use of the widow succession is to the rights of only one of such
of a homestead out of the separate property of persons.-Phelan v. Smith, (Cal.) 34 P. 667.
the husband, which he had disposed of by will,
and which he had_in no manner selected as a
homestead.-In re Eyres' Estate, (Wash.) 34 P.
13. Civil Code, $$ 1384, 1402, provide that
831; Eyres v. Baker. Id.
on the death of a husband intestate the title
6. The homestead set apart to a widow un- to one-half of the community properts Fests in
der Code Civil Proc. & 1465, which provides the surviving, wife, subject to the debts ani
that, if no homestead has been selected in the the control of the probate court for purposes
lifetime of the deceased, the probate court must of administration. Held, that the widow could
select a homestead "for the use of the surviv- not by a conveyance of her interest in the lani
ing husband or wife and the minor children," bar a homestead therein for herself and chi
is exempt, not only from the claims of the cred- dren.-Phelan v. Smith, (Cal.) 34 P. 667.
itors of the deceased husband, but also from
Mortgage by husband.
her own debts contracted by her previous to
his death. Beatty, C. J., dissenting.–Keyes v. that a married person's homestead cannot be
14. Under Civil Code, $ 1242, providing
Cyrus, (Cal.) 34 P. 722.
incumbered except by the joint act of husband
Conveyance to heir.
and wife, a mortgage by the husband alone is
7. An instrument executed by testator's void, and is not validated by the hushand's
widow recited that in consideration of $50,000, subsequent acquirement of the homestead by
the amount of her legacy, paid her by one of a decree of divorce which assigns it to him,
since a subsequently acquired title does not re 3. While a husband's duty to give his wife
late back so as to give effect to a void instru- decent burial includes the placing of some mark
ment-Powell v. Patison, (Cal.) 34 P. 677. of identification over her burial place, still if
he was poor, and she left a considerable estate,
the court might allow a reasonable amount froin
her estate towards a monument.-In re Wering-
er's Estate, (Cal.) 34 P. 825.
1. One witness testified that defendant, Relinquishment of rights of husband
while passing the shop of deceased, with whom in wife's earnings.
he had had a difficulty, shot at him, whereupon 4. Under Civil Code, $ 158, allowing hus-
defendant's horses began to run, carrying de- band and wife to enter into any engagement or
fendant away from deceased, and that defend transaction with each other respecting prop-
ant, when 80 feet from him, again shot at erty, and section 159, providing that they may
deceased. Defendant testified that deceased by contract alter their" legal relations to prop-
threw stones at him and that then he fired the erty, and section 160, making their mutual con-
first shot over deceased's head, and that he sent a sufficient consideration for such
fired the second as deceased approached him, agreement, a husband may relinquish to his
Deceased was unarmed and on foot. Held, that wife his right in money to be earned by her in
the shooting was not done in self-defense-nursing and boarding a person, so that she may
State v. Sortor, (Kan.) 34 P. 1036.
sue therefor without joining him. Read v.
Drunkenness as a defense.
Rahm, 4 P. 111, 65 Cal. 343, explained.--Wren
2. In a homicide case, an instruction that v. Wren, (Cal.) 34 P. 775.
5. She is not required in such case to al.
Do act of a voluntarily intoxicated person is
less criminal by reason of such condition, is lege that defendant had notice of the agree.
ment between herself and husband when the
proper in connection with qualifications as to
cases where the actual existence of an intention services were rendered.-Wren v. Wren, (Cal.)
34 P. 775.
is a necessary element of the offense.--People
v. Lane, (Cal.) 34 P, 856.
6. A wife may enjoin the sale of com.
3. Previous controversies and difficulties be munity lands on execution issued on a judg.
tween defendant and deceased may be shown tract made by him only to pay the judgment
ment rendered against her husband on a con-
by defendant, but it is improper to try the mercreditor commissions for finding a purchaser
its of such controversies. State v. Sortor,
for such lands, where they were not sold, and
(Kan.) 31 P. 1036.
4. On a trial for the murder of a militia- there is nothing to show that she authorized
man, the fact that defendant had been ordered her husband to sell, contract to sell, or find a
out of the way by an officer, not the deceased, purchaser for them.-McGlaufin v. Merriam,
when the company was engaged in skirmish (Wash.) 34 P. 561.
drill, several hours before the murder, is not
7. Ás Act 1869, declaring certain prop-
admissible in evidence, since any inference of ill erty acquired by husband or wife community
feeling by defendant against deceased on this property, and giving the husband power to dis-
ground is too strained. - People v. Mitchell, pose of the same, did not provide for its dis-
(Cal.) 34 P. 698.
posal on the death of a spouse, as was done by
later laws, such property would have been ad-
ministered according to the rules of those
5. An instruction that if defendant shot states where such property and laws existed;
at deceased, and that, if death would be the and these rules were that the community was
natural consequence of such shooting, defend- dissolved by the death of either spouse, and
ant would be presumed to have intended it, that the right of disposal in either spouse then
but that this presumption is not conclusive, is ended, and the property became vested by moie-
not erroneous, as shifting the burden of proof ties in the survivor and children. – Hill
from the state. --State v. Sortor, (Kan.) 34 P. Young, (Wash.) 34 P. 144.
8. Where a wife has been dead for eight
years, leaving an only child and a husband
6. On the trial of an accessory before the surviving, and there has been no administra-
fact for murder, while the declaration of the tion on her estate or upon the community prop-
principal, made in the absence of defendant, and erty, it will be presumed, in favor of the child,
shortly after the shooting, that he, the princi-
that there are no community debts, or neces-
pal, killed deceased, may be inadmissible as eri-sity for administration, and that he is entitled
dence, it is harmless error when there is no con- real property as heir of his mother.-Hill v.
to possession of his share of the community
troversy as to who actually, killed, deceased. Young, (Wash.) 34 P. 144.
State v. Patterson, (Kan.) 34 P. 784.
9. Production of a deed to a husband dur.
ing his wife's life for a valuable consideration
Horse and Street Railroads.
is prima facie proof that the land was com-
munity property, and the burden of proving the
contrary is on the husband's grantees.-Hill v.
Young, (Wash.) 34 P. 144.
HUSBAND AND WIFE.
Action by wife.
See, also, “Dirorce;" "Homestead."
10. Though a married woman has not com-
Privileged communication, see "Witness," 2.
plied with the statute in respect to married
women becoming sole traders, nor filed a sep-
Liability of wife-Expense of last ill- arate property list, she may sue for and recover
ness, funeral, and monument.
money due for board furnished by her and for
1. Á husband who has means being declared signed the claim to her, and testified in sup-
offices rented by her husband, he having as-
liable by Civil Code, ş 174, for his wife's support of her right to collect it and the money
port, her estate should not be charged with the due for the board, and there being no claim as-
expense of doctors, nurses, and medicines ob-serted by creditors of the husband.-Strayer v.
tained by him for her in her last illness.-In re Leonard, (Mont.) 34 P. 880.
Weringer's Estate, (Cal.) 34 P. 825.
2. A husband is liable for the funeral ex- Separation and maintenance.
penses of his wife, and therefore her adminis 11. In an action by a wife for permanent
trator should not be allowed for expenditures support and maintenance, under Civil Code,
therefor.-In re Weringer's Estate, (Cal.) 34 P. 8 137, an order allowing alimony and attorney's
fees pendente lite may be made without await
ing determination of an issue raised by an an name of the state.-State F. Doe, Tachy 3.8
swer alleging plaintiff's insanity, and praying 154.
the appointment of a guardian ad litem for her. 2. An information is not defective merch
- Storke v. Storke, (Cal.) 34 P. 339.
because the word "information" des me
12. In an action by a wife for mainte pear in the body of it.--People 1. Baker, iai
nance, after an appeal had been taken by de 34 P. 649.
fendant from an order for the payment of $50 3. An information for burglary need
per month alimony and $50 attorney's fees, the show on its face that the conditions episode
court made another order reciting the fact of which the law requires in order that a persoa
appeal, and directing defendant to pay $350 offense be prosecuted by information. Sua
"in lien" of the $50 attorney's fees given by v. Anderson, 31 P. 969, 5 Wash, 35), fulered
the first order, “to enable her to prosecute said-State v. Munson, (Wash.) 34 P. 932.
action,” but before notice of appeal from such
second order changed it by striking out the
provision that it was in lieu of the $50. Held, 4. Where & county attorney files us
that the second order was a new order for fur- formation charging the defendant with less
ther attorney's fees, and not a change of the a nuisance, and positively rerifies the spot "si
first order after appeal therefrom. -Storke v. true in substance and in fact," motira o
Storke, (Cal.) 34 P. 339.
quash the warrant and the information, and
plea in abatement, upon the ground that is
13. In order to sustain an action for crim- the county attorney has no personal bez
information is not properly verified, and ir
inal conversation it is not necessary that the
intercourse should have been accomplished by edge of the facts alleged therein
, are property
force.-Bedan v Turney, (Cal.) 34 P. 442.
overruled.-State v. Dugan, (Kan.) 34 P. #
14. It is immaterial, in such an action, if Signature of district attorney.
the defendant had had criminal intercourse
with plaintiff's wife, whether plaintiff was im- trict attorney is signed to an indictment on
5. It is sufficient that the name of the o
potent, or whether the child borne by her was formation bị his deputy. – People F. Ertne
begotten by defendant or her husband.-Bedan
v. Turney, (Cal.) 34 P. 442.
(Cal.) 34 P. 237.
Indorsement of witnesses.
6. Defendant cannot complain that t
state was permitted to indorse the names of a
ditional witnesses upon an information, if a
cient time was given to inquire as to the engine
acter and credibility of the witnesses before the
Of witness, see "Witness," 14-17.
introduction of evidence, - State 1. Site
(Kan.) 34 P. 1036.
Averment of place.
Allowance for, see "Public Lands," 17.
7. The words "county of Los Angeles
Public, see "Municipal Corporations," 27-45.
of California," having been used in the
part of an information, an allegation therai:
er that the crime was committed at the cout
and state aforesaid" is a sufficient avérent :
venue.--People v. Baker, (Cal.) 34 P. 649.
Rights of Cherokee Nation, see, also, “Public Negativing exceptions in statute.
Lands," 12, 13.
8. Under Gen. St. 1889, par. 3900, makita
Rights of Cherokee Nation.
it unlawful to remove buildings from land
By treaties, laws of congress, and the which there is an unsatisfied mortgage
, duis at
patent of 1838, the Cherokee Nation was grant corded, ithout first obtaining from the market
ed the use of the "perpetual outlet west" gee, his agent or assign, written permissha,
known as the “Cherokee Outlet," but such use is necessary to allege in an information that
was made subject to forfeiture in case the na- the removal was made without permission ing
tion abandoned the outlet. Held, that by the the mortgagee, his agent or assign, and wide
purchase by the United States of all lands this averment an information is insuficient #
west thereof from Mexico, and the sale and sustain a conviction. -State v. Decker, (Ka.
on the east to other Indian tribes, all right in Conviction of less offense than charged
conveyance by the Cherokee Nation of the land 34 P. 780.
the nation to the use and occupation of such
outlet was lost and abandoned. - Guthrie v.
9. One indicted for felonious assault cu
Hall, 34 P. 380, 1 Okl. 406.
be convicted of assault and battery.-Cheat
v. Territory, (N, M.) 34 P. 448.
INDICTMENT AND INFORMA- Joinder of counts and election.
10. Misdemeanors may be joined in the
same indictment, and the court may refuse to
Particular crimes. see “Arson;" Disorderly it will proceed. – United States v. Vigil
, a. ]
compel the prosecution to elect on which mer!
House;" "False Pretenses,” 3; "Obstructing 134 P. 630.
Justice;" "Receiving Stolen Goods."
Consolidation, see “Criminal Law," 15.
Waiver of objections.
Conviction of less offense than charged, juris 11. An objection that the indictment de
diction, see "Criminal Law," 4.
not sufficiently describe the paper which 52
Description of money stolen, see "Larceny." 1. the subject of the false representations culti
Indorsing names of witnesses, see, also, "Crim- be raised for the first time at the trial by the
inal Law," 32.
tion to dismiss.--State v. Bloodsworth, (01. #
Offenses against election laws, see "Elections P. 1023.
and Voters," 9, 10.
Variance between information and proof, see
Of negotiable instrument, see "Negotiable liv
1. Where, in the caption of an information,
the case is entitled the “State of Washington"
against the defendants, Daming them, it suffi-
ciently appears that the prosecution is in the See "Guardian and Ward."
When granted - To restrain injuries
See "Indictment and Information."
avoidable by complainant.
7. In an action to restrain the flooding of
plaintiff's premises by defendant's reservoir, evi.
dence that plaintiff could make his cellar water-
tight, and thereby prevent the flooding of it,
Against building dam, see "Waters and Water a part of the injury complained of,-was prop-
erly rejected, as plaintiff was under no obliga-
waste, see “Waste."
tion to do this.-Sylvester v. Jerome, (Colo.
By taxpayer of threatened acts of state offi- Sup.) 34 P. 760.
cers, see "States and State Officers,” 9. Provisions of writ.
Enjoining obstruction of navigable stream, see
8. Where plaintiff's premises were being
manding defendant to refrain from diverting
Remedy at law.
water into the reservoir, instead of enjoining
1. Mills' Ann. St. & 2272, part of an act him from running water into it as then con-
flooded from defendant's reservoir, a writ com-
giving the right to construct reservoirs for cer- structed, was proper, as defendant was not pre-
tain purposes, by providing that the owners vented from repairing the reservoir, and ap-
thereof shall be liable for all damages arising plying to have the injunction modified or diso
mon-law principle, and does not take away the solved.-Sylvester v. Jerome, (Colo. Sup.) 34 P.
right to injunctive relief against the filling of
a reservoir where the injuries suffered there- Dissolution.
from are irreparable. - Sylvester v. Jerome, 9. A court, on motion to dissolve å tempo-
(Colo. Sup.) 34 P. 760.
rary injunction, is not compelled to refuse to
2. The owner of houses, after they have consider it until the final trial, merely because
been removed from his land onto a public the face of the petition shows no cause of ac-
street, cannot maintain a suit to enjoin their tion, and so it appears that the temporary in-
removal, as he has an adequate remedy at law. junction was improvidently allowed. -Holder-
-Stowell v. Waddingham, (Cal.) 34 P. 436. man v. Jones, (Kan.) 34 P. 352.
Violation and punishment.
3. One who has wharves and warehouses 10. Defendant, recognizing the owner's ti-
on tide lands belonging to the state, conceding tle to certain land, agreed to cut the hay for
that this entitles him. under the tide-land act, him, but soon thereafter purported to sell the
(Laws 1889–90, p. 435,) to the exclusive right grass to L., and agreed to cut it for him. Aft-
to purchase, not only the tide land actually erwards, when an injunction against interfer-
covered by the improvenient, but also such an ing with the grass was served on him, defend-
additioral amount adjoining the same as may ant said the grass was his own, and he was
be necessary to the use and enjoyment of his going to have it. He accompanied L. to con-
buildings, is not entitled
injunction sult "their lawyer," and on their return he
against erections by another on such adjoining advised the latter to cut the grass. Held, that
tide land, where he has other means of access defendant was guilty of contempt in procuring
to his buildings, as in such case there is no ir- the violation of the injunction.-State v. Fourth
reparable injury.-Morse v. O'Connell, (Wash.) Judicial District Court, (Mont.) 34 P. 39.
34 P. 426.
4. An injunction will not issue to restrain
the passage of a municipal ordinance which is
11. Where it is not alleged in an action on an
within the powers conferred on the mayor and injunction bond that plaintiff in the injunction
trustees, on the ground that it impairs the ob- suit is a party thereto, the action cannot be
ligation of a contract, when it does not appear maintained against him.-Asevado v. Orr, (Cal.)
that irreparable injury will immediately result 34 P. 777.
from the passage of the ordinance.-Lewis v.
12. To determine the liability of the ob-
Denver City Water-Works Co., (Colo. Sup.) 34 ligors in an injunction bond, the voluntary dis-
missal of the suit by plaintiff has the same
effect as a decision of the court that the in-
junction was improperly sued out. — Asevado
5. If the board of trade of a city and its v. Orr, (Cal.) 34 P. 777.
officers assume and exercise authority not con-
ferred on them by the statute regulating pub- Action for wrongful injunction.
lic warehouses and the inspection of grain,
13. An action on the case will not lie for im-
there is ample authority in the state, by its properly suing out an injunction unless it is
public officers, to prevent such unlawful exer- charged in the complaint as an abuse of the
cise of power, and compel obedience to the process of the court through malice and without
law; but another board of trade, which suf. probable cause.-Asevado V. Orr, (Cal.) 34 P.
fers no particular and substantial injury there. 777.
by, cannot obtain an injunction against the
offender.-Jones v. Board of Trade, (Kan.) 34
Injuria Absque Damnum.
Negligence of attorney, see "Attorney and Cli-
6. A complaint by a corporation operating
a sawmill, which alleges that plaintiff, the
owner in fee of certain land, commenced the Lion.
construction of a logging road thereon to con-
vey timber to the mill; that defendants en labor more than she owes for board, he has po
Where an innkeeper owes his guest for
tered on the land, and obstrncted the men em- lien upon her trunk.-Hanlin v. Walters, (Colo.
ployed by plaintiff in continuing the work,
threatening to use violence should they persist, App.) 34 P. 686.
whereby the work was stopped; that such in-
terruption was repeated when an attempt was
again made to construct the road, and that de-
fendants threaten such interruption whenever See, also: "Assignment for Benefit of Credit-
the work is attempted; that the road is neces-
ors;" "Fraudulent Conveyances.'
sary for the operation of the sawmill; and Abatement of action, see "Abatement and Re
that defendants are insolvent, warrants the vival.'
granting of a preliminary injunction.--Sisson, Remedy provided for winding up affairs of
Crocker & Co. v. Johnson, (Cal.) 34 P. 617. bank, see “Banks and Banking," 2-4.