"subject" of a monarchy corresponds to the "citizen" of a republic.1 SUBJECT-SUBJECT-MATTER (See also MATTER, vol. 14, p. 976). See note 2. SUB-LEASE. See LEASE, vol 12, p. 1036. SUBMISSION--(See also ARBITRATION, vol. 1, p. 646; REFEREES; SUBMIT).—A submission is a contract between two or more parties, whereby they agree to refer the subject in dispute to others and to be bound by their award. The submission itself implies an agreement to abide the result, even where such agreement is not expressed.3 SUBMISSION TO COURT (ON AGREED CASE). 1. In re Birdsong, 39 Fed. Rep. 601; CITIZENSHIP, vol. 3, p. 242. Thus in The Pizarro, 2 Wheat. (U. S.) 227, where the treaty of 1795 with Spain was under consideration, it was held that "the term 'subjects,' when applied to persons owing allegiance to Spain, must be construed in the same sense as the terms citizens' or 'inhabitants' when applied to persons owing allegiance to the United States." British Subjects.-See BRITISH, vol. 2, p. 570. Liege-Subjects.--See LIEGE, vol. 13, P. 574. 2. The constitutions of many of the states provide that no law shall contain more than one "subject," which shall be expressed in the title. Upon these provisions there have been numerous decisions, which will be found set out under the title STATUTES. There are similar provisions using the word "object" instead of "subject." See OBJECT, vol. 17, p. 1. The subject-matter involved in a litigation is the right which one party claims as against the other, and demands the judgment of the court upon; as, for example, the right in ejectment to have possession of the lands; in assumpsit. to recover a demand; in equity, to have a mortgage foreclosed for an 1. Parties, 150. 2. Amendment, 151. 4. Costs; Argument of Counsel, VII. Effect of Submission, 153. 2. Waiver of Objections to Form 3. On Admissions—Estoppel,156. amount claimed to be due upon it, or to have specific performance of a contract, and so on. Jacobson v. Miller, 41 Mich. 93. In New York Code.-Section 3253 of the New York Code of Civil Procedure authorizes the allowance of extra costs in an action wherein rights of property are involved, and a pecuniary value may be predicated of the subjectmatter involved. Held, that "subjectmatter involved " refers simply to property or other valuable thing, the possession, ownership, or title to which is to be determined by the action, and does not include other property, although it may be directly or remotely affected by the result. Čonaughty v. Saratoga Čo. Bank, 92 N. Y. 404. See also Coleman v. Chauncey, 7 Robt. (N. Y.) 578. In Borst . Corey, 15 N. Y. 509, it was held that "subject-matter," as used in section 50 of the code, was synonymous with the term "cause of action " contained in the preceding section. "Subject of the Action."--See CoUNTERCLAIM, vol. 4. P. 331. "Subject To."-See IMPLIED COVENANTS, vol. 9, p. 962. 3. From the opinion of the court in Whitcher v. Whitcher, 49 N. H. 180; 6 Am. Rep. 486. I. DEFINITION.-By the submission of a controversy, as treated in this article, is meant the practice of preparing an agreed statement of the material facts in the cause and submitting such statement to the court for a decision upon the question or questions of law involved therein.1 II. UPON WHAT SUBMITTED—1. The Case-Its Nature and Purpose. -The controversy is submitted upon what is variously known as a case made, case agreed or stated, agreed statement of facts, or special case. This is a written statement of all the facts in the cause, to which is added an agreement between plaintiff and defendant, or their respective counsel, to the effect that the facts are as therein agreed upon and set forth, whereby the necessity of a trial by jury is dispensed with, and a decision is obtained from the court upon the law arising out of the agreed facts.2 The practice of making a case for the court is said to be a substitute for a special verdict, and is resorted to for convenience and to save the expense of a trial, its purpose being not to make evidence for a jury, but to supersede the action of a jury altogether 1. As to submission to arbitrators, see ARBITRATION AND AWARD, vol. 1, p. 646; to referees, see REFEREES, vol. 20, p. 660. 2. 1 Bouv. L. Dict. 288; 1 Troubat & Haly's Pr. (Pa.), § 752; Fuller . Trevoir, 8 S. & R. (Pa.) 529; Diehl v. Ihrie, 3 Whart. (Pa.) 143; Whitesides v. Russell, 8 W. & S. (Pa.) 44. See CASE, vol. 3, p. 29. A proceeding similar to this and described as another method of finding a species of special verdict is that in which trial is had by a jury, and they find a verdict generally for the plaintiff; but subject nevertheless to the opinion of the judge of the court above on a special case stated by the counsel on both sides with regard to a matter of law. This method has the advantage over a special verdict, that it is attended with much less expense and obtains a much speedier decision. 3 Bl. Com. 378. Now, in England, a case may be submitted to the court on an agreed statement of facts and with or without formal pleadings. 2 Cooley's Blackstone (3d ed.), 377, n. Under Indiana Rev. Stat., § 553, providing that parties shall have the right, with or without process, by agreement to that effect, to submit any matter of controversy between them to any court that would otherwise have jurisdiction upon an agreed statement of facts signed by the parties, but requiring an affidavit that the controversy is real, where, upon application to sell a dece dent's real estate to pay debts, issues are formed and the case submitted upon an agreed statement of facts, the proceedings do not constitute an agreed case. Witz v. Dale, 129 Ind. 120. Distinguished from Special Verdict.— "The case agreed may occur any time after the suit is instituted, as well before as after issue joined, whilst a special verdict, of course, supposes that the case has been regularly matured, and, for the most part, that an issue has been joined, which the jury is sworn to try. Some diversities may grow out of this difference worthy to be noted. Thus, where the case is agreed before defendant pleads, the agreement cures the want of a plea, and the cause is submitted to the court upon the agreed facts, without reference to any particular form of defense; the general question to be determined being whether the plaintiff, upon the whole case as stated, ought to recover; but where an issue has been joined when the case is agreed, the decision must be restricted to the issue." 4 Min. Inst. (2d ed.) 835. See VERDICT. Waiver of Jury.-Case made or stated, is not to be confounded with the waiver of jury which exists, by statute, in some states, since in the former no inferences of fact are admitted, while in the latter the parties submit an agreed statement of all the evidence from which the court may make any just inferences of fact and upon them decide the questions of law. Hodge . First Nat. Bank, 22 Gratt. (Va.) 51; Dearing by imparting to facts ascertained by mutual agreement, the judicial certainty requisite to enable the court to pass upon the law and give judgment on the whole.1 2. Requisites Contents. In order to enable the court to pass judgment, when this method of trial is adopted, the case made or stated, being a substitute for and in the nature of a special verdict, and equivalent to a finding of facts by the jury, must set out distinctly all the material facts as agreed upon, but not the evidence from which such facts may be inferred. The nature of the controversy should be described specifically; and the judg v. Rucker, 18 Gratt. (Va.) 426; Wickham v. Martin, 13 Gratt. (Va.) 446. See Virginia Code 1873, ch. 158, § 36; Martinton v. Fairbanks, 112 U. S. 670. 1. McLughan v. Bovard, 4 Watts (Pa.) 308; Diehl v. Ihrie, 3 Whart. (Pa.) 143. The object of a case made is to enable parties, without resort to legal process or formal pleadings, to submit to the court for its adjudication some alleged cause of action or claim for relief. Williams v. Rochester, 2 Lans. (N. Y.) 169. "A case stated is a substitute for a special verdict, adopted for convenience to save the labor and expense of finding the same facts by the jury in the form of a special verdict." Rogers, J., in Whitesides v. Russell, 8 W. & S. (Pa.) 44. In McKethan v. Ray, 71 N. Car. 165, it was said that the object of section 315 North Carolina Code Civ. Proc., is simply to dispense with the formalities of a summons, complaint and answer, and permit the parties to agree upon the facts for the judgment of the court. Loss-Destruction.-A case stated is a substitute for a verdict; and when lost or destroyed, and the parties cannot agree on a new one, the cause goes to the jury as if no case had been made. It is wrong to appoint a commissioner to take testimony of its contents, and give judgment on his report. Cook v. Shrauder, 25 Pa. St. 312. 2. Old Colony R. Co. v. Wilder, 137 Mass. 536; Goodrich v. Detroit, 12 Mich. 279; Ford v. Cameron, 19 Mo. App. 467; Union Sav. Bank v. Fife, 101 Pa. St. 388; Helser v. Coyle, 58 Pa. St. 461; Berks County v. Pile, 18 Pa. St. 493; Holmes v. Wallace, 46 Pa. St. 266; Newark, etc., R. Co. v. Perry County, 30 Ohio St. 120; Raimond v. Terrebonne Parish, 132 U. S. 192; Burr v. Des Moines Nav., etc., Co., 1 Wall. (U.S.) 99; Glen v. Fant, 134 U. S. 398; Norris v. Jackson, 9 Wall. (U. S.) 125. Where the counsel for plaintiff and defendant filed an agreement in writing" that the evidence, oral and record, and the entire records, shall be treated as a case stated, judgment to be entered thereon by the court according to its views of the law and facts, each party reserving the right to sue out a writ of error,"and the court afterwards entered judgment on the case stated for the plaintiff, it was held that the agreement was bad as a case stated. Union Sav. Bank v. Fife, 101 Pa. St. 388. A case stated must contain a full and certain statement of all the facts belonging to the case, so that, when a judgment is entered thereon, it will be capable of enforcement to the same extent as though reached by the verdict of a jury. Washburn v. Baldwin, 10 Phila. (Pa.) 472. In a case made or agreed, the parties. need not agree upon all the facts in the case, but may state such facts as are pertinent to a particular question of law, and agree that the judgment be entered for the plaintiff or defendant, according as the opinion may be in favor of the one or the other party upon the facts as stated. Stockton v. Copeland, 23 W. Va. 696. New York Code Civ. Proc., § 532, provides that in pleading a judgment, or other determination of a court or officer of special jurisdiction, it is not necessary to state the facts conferring jurisdiction; but the judgment or determination may be stated to have been duly given or made. This rule may with propriety be applied to the statement of facts required in a case agreed as required by section 1279; whatever is a sufficient statement of facts, according to the former, to impliedly allege jurisdiction, is a sufficient statement of facts, according to the latter, that jurisdiction existed. There is no ment to be given for the party prevailing and the amount thereof, or the mode by which it can be liquidated, should also be stated.1 reason for greater particularity in admitting facts for the submission of a controversy than in alleging them in pleading. Brownell v. Greenwich, 114 N. Y. 518. The court will not assume the office of a jury in deciding upon a special case submitted by agreement of the parties, when the principal questions are questions of fact, to be decided upon the conflicting testimony of witnesses whose credit is made a matter of question. Brockbank v. Anderson, 7 Scott N. R. 813; 13 L. J. C. P. 102. Where there is an essential fact in dispute, as, for example, whether natural gas is a volatile substance or not, the supreme court will quash a case stated. Ford v. Buchanan, 111 Pa. St. 31. The United States Supreme Court on a case stated can only give judgment where facts alone are stated. Should there be any question as to the effect or competency of evidence, or as to any rulings of the court below on evidence examined, the case is not a 66 case stated." Burr v. Des Moines Nav., etc., Co., 1 Wall. (U. S.) 99; Pomeroy v. State Bank, 1 Wall. (U.S.) 592. In an action against a guardian for value of services voluntarily rendered in rearing and educating his ward, over and above the value of services rendered by such ward, an agreed statement of facts was submitted which set forth the character, but not the value, of such services. It was held not to be error for the court, upon the defendant's denying that the plaintiff was entitled to more than the services of the ward, to find for the defendant, since the agreed case omitted to set forth essential facts, viz., the respective values of the plaintiff's and ward's services. Brown v. Rogers, 61 Ind. 449. "A statement of facts by the parties, or a finding of facts by the circuit court of the United States, is strictly analogous to a special verdict, and must state the ultimate facts of the case presenting questions of law only, and not be a recital of evidence or of circumstances, which may tend to prove the ultimate facts, or from which they may be inferred." Gray, J., in Raimond v. Terrebonne Parish. 132 U. S. 192. Where Material Fact Is Omitted. In Massachusetts, it is said that where a material fact is "inadvertently omitted, Old or is a fact which is susceptible of proof, one way or the other, the usual course is for this court to discharge the case stated and remand the unsettled question of fact to be tried in the superior court by the proper tribunal." Colony R. Co. v. Wilder, 137 Mass. 537, citing Gregory v. Pierce, 4 Met. (Mass.) 478; Lefavour v. Homan, 3 Allen (Mass.) 354; Morse v. Mason, 103 Mass. 560; Meserve v. Andrews, 104 Mass. 360. Examples. Where a suit was brought to recover a statutory penalty, and the cause was submitted to the court on a case stated, which failed to show whether the acts relied on to establish the defendant's liability took place within the two years provided by law for the prosecution of such actions, or in what state they took place, such case is not sufficient to sustain a judgment. Com. 7. Howard (Pa. 1892), 24 Atl. Rep. 308. An agreed case occupies the same footing and stands in lieu of a special verdict, and the court pronounces the conclusion of law precisely as if a jury had found a verdict in that form. In order that judgment may be pronounced, all the facts necessary to a determination of the case must be definitely ascertained; if there be any ambiguity or omission of facts necessary to a recovery, or any lack of clearness and certainty on material points, the judgment cannot be allowed to stand. Therefore, in an action to attach the separate property of a wife, where the agreed statement did not show whether the debts were those of the husband or the wife, or whether the latter had any separate estate, or whether the debts were evidenced by notes, or, if so, whether the notes were signed by husband or wife or both, the cause was remanded. Gage v. Gates, 62 Mo. 412. See Carr v. Lewis Coal Co., 96 Mo. 149; 9 Am. St. Rep. 328. Where, on appeal, the statement refers to certain exhibits said to be annexed, but which are not, and where it is left to either party to add to the facts in the case agreed, the case will be remanded-such addition being wholly inadmissible, since the controversy is to be decided solely upon the facts contained in the agreed case. Piedmont R. Co. v. Reidsville, 101 N. Car. 404. 1. Berks County v. Pile, 18 Pa. St. III. NATURE OF CONTROVERSY TO BE SUBMITTED.-In order that the court may have jurisdiction to hear and decide a controversy submitted upon an agreed statement of facts, it is primarily essential that such controversy be real, not fictitious, and the proceedings in good faith to determine the rights of the parties, to 493: Williams v. Rochester, 2 Lans. (N. Y.) 169. See Kennedy v. New York, 79 N. Y. 361. If a special case is made in a cause pending, the nature of the relief sought is sufficiently indicated to the court by the form of action. If, however, process and pleading are waived and the parties come before the court upon a naked statement of facts, the record does not show the relief desired, unless it is expressed in the agreement itself. In such case the court acquires jurisdiction of the parties and the subjectmatter by force of the agreement, and if nothing is contained therein as to the judgment or decree to be rendered upon the facts, the court is powerless to act. Central City Water Co. v. Kimber, Colo. 475. In Overman v. Sims, 96 N. Car. 451, Smith, J., said: "We do not approve of this method of presenting a mere narrative of the facts, out of which the controversy springs, without any statement of the subject-matter of contention, and the conflicting claims of the litigants to be passed on and decided. While formal pleadings are not required, nor any preliminary process, to secure jurisdiction, the statute manifestly contemplates the existence of a controversy, and the case agreed should set out its nature, so that the court may understand what is intended to be submitted, and thus render an intelligent decision." A case stated should "specifically describe the controversy arising upon the facts, and the rulings to be made, according to the opinion of the court, of their legal operation." See Moore 7. Hinnant, 87 N. Car. 505; McKethan 7. Ray, 71 N. Car. 165. But there are precedents where jurisdiction has been assumed and exercised, and the nature of the controversy inferred from the mere statement of facts. Hager v. Nixon, 69 N. Car. 108; Lewis v. Wake County, 74 N. Car. 194. A court is not bound to accept the submission of a cause to its decision without a jury, where the assessment of unliquidated damages is involved; but if the submission is accepted, the 24 C. of L.-10 145 court should assess the damages. Haldeman v. Chalmers, 19 Tex. I. Nominal Damages. If a case is submitted to the court upon an agreed statement of facts, in which the damages are not fixed or an assessment thereof provided for, the judgment, if for the plaintiff, will be for nominal damages only. McAneany v. Jewett, 10 Allen (Mass.) 151. Form; Signature.-It has been held that a case made before trial must be signed by each of the parties, or by their attorneys, in order that it may be heard by the court. Farrand v. Bentley, 6 Mich. 280; Branchardiere v. Elvery, 18 L. J. Exch. 383. 1. Washburn v. Baldwin, 10 Phila. (Pa.) 472; Williams v. Rochester, 2 Lans. (N. Y.) 169. Where the proceedings on their face appear to be an actual adversary proceeding, with no indication of a feigned action, the agreement as to the evidence will not change the character of the case nor overturn the presumption that there is an actual controversy. Witz v. Dale, 129 Ind. 120. Where the judgment is genuine, an agreed case will not be considered fictitious merely because it contains no reference to the rights of third parties. State v. Wilson, 2 Lea (Tenn.) 204. "This mode of procedure is not intended to provide for the submission of questions of law for the opinion of the court merely, without a case in which a judgment might be rendered, in accordance with its opinion, legally determining the rights of the parties. It does not authorize a submission of questions in cases that are merely anticipated, nor of cases where the facts are disputed, nor is such submission intended to be merely advisory as to the rights of the parties. It is rather a substitute for an action, and its effect upon the rights of the parties is the same as that of an action. It is a short and convenient mode for the final adjudication of the case submitted." Day C. J., in Newark, etc., R. Co. v. Perry County, 30 Ohio St. 120. Where it appeared that the same attorney prepared the statement, and |