DECISION. See Courts, §§ 97-185. DECLARATION. See Pleading, §§ 36-72. DECLARATIONS. See Criminal Law, § 415; Evidence, § 271. DEDICATION. I. NATURE AND REQUISITES. 82 (Mich.) The right to make a common-law dedication of a way is not abridged by statutory regulations.-Crosby v. City of Greenville, 150 N. W. 246. § 19 (Mich.) The recording of a plat is at least an offer to dedicate the land laid off into streets to public use.-Crosby v. City of Greenville, 150 N. W. 246. A grantor filing a plat and conveying lots on the streets recognizes the streets, and the purchasers become vested with an interest appurtenant to the streets, including the rights of abutting owners therein.-Id. $35 (Mich.) An acceptance of an offer to dedicate a street is shown by the municipality making improvements and repairs and user thereof, or any part thereof.-Crosby v. City cf Greenville, 150 N. W. 246. II. OPERATION AND EFFECT. § 48 (Iowa) Person who bought and sold lots described as in the original town of A. held to have recognized the plat of such town and the streets and alleys, and not entitled to question the legality of the plat.-Schultz v. Stringer, 150 N. W. 1063. DEEDS. See Adverse Possession, § 71; Escrows; Fraudulent Conveyances, § 166; Gifts, 88 34, 43; Homestead, 88 118, 146; Husband and Wife, §§ 14, 31, 81, 195; Limitation of Actions, § 44; Mortgages; Records, § 9; Reformation of Instruments, § 36; Trusts, §§ 25, 51, 59; Wills, §§ 88, 93. (C) Estates and Interests Created. § 128 (Iowa) A deed conveying property during the natural life of the grantee and to her heirs and assigns forever creates a fee simple under the rule in Shelley's Case.-Woodford v. Glass, 150 N. W. 69. Acts 32d Gen. Assem. c. 159, abolishing the rule in Shelley's Case, is not retrospective.-Id. 8133 (Iowa) Under the Code provisions allowing the creation of estates to commence in the future, an, estate must be created at the time of delivery; the enjoyment only being postponed.-Ransom v. Pottawattamie County, 150 N. W. 657. IV. PLEADING AND EVIDENCE. § 196 (Iowa) Relation between widow and a daughter and her husband held not confidential, and they did not have the burden of proving the validity of a conveyance by her to them.-Ölsen v. Olsen, 150 N. W. 1070. § 196 (Mich.) The burden is on a son to show that a deed and lease given him by his mother due influence.-Guinon v. Guinon, 150 N. W. were understood by her, and not secured by un 311. $208 (N.D.) Evidence held to show that plaintiff did not reserve any control over a deed deposited in escrow in a bank.-Seifert v. Lanz, 150 N. W. 568. I. REQUISITES AND VALIDITY. (A) Nature and Essentials of Conveyanc-in settlement of his claim against the husband's es in General. § 211 (Iowa) Evidence held to show that a deed by a widowed mother to her son-in-law was fected by fraud.-Olsen v. Olsen, 150 N. W. estate and in part a gift to her daughter unaf1070. $9 (Iowa) A deed, conveying a present interest in land and deposited with a third person for delivery to the grantee after the grantor's death, is a valid deed.-Ransom v. Pottawat-finding that the deed sought to be canceled was § 211 (Minn.) Evidence held to sustain a tamie County, 150 N. W. 657. procured by undue influence.-Wortz v. Wortz, 150 N. W. 809. (C) Execution. $50 (N.D.) That a deed when signed by the wife contained minor blanks afterwards filled in by the husband held not to render it invalid. See Libel and Slander. -Seifert v. Lanz, 150 N. W. 568. (D) Delivery. DEFAMATION. DEFAULT. § 61 (Minn.) A deed deposited with a third See Mortgages, § 414. person for delivery after death of the grantor. but reserving in the grantor the right to recall, conveys no title.-Wortz v. Wortz, 150 N. W. 809. (E) Validity. DELAY. See Carriers, §§ 99, 106, 176. DELIVERY. See Deeds, § 61; Escrows; Insurance, § 825. DEMONSTRATIVE EVIDENCE. See Criminal Law, § 404. DEMURRER. See Pleading, § 198. § 130 (Iowa) Evidence held to sustain a finding that a wife was not guilty of cruel and inhuman treatment of her husband.-Main v. See Guaranty, § 56; Principal and Surety, 8 Main, 150 N. W. 590. 99. § 42 (Minn.) Two prior voluntary dismissals without defendant's consent held no defense, under Gen. St. 1913, § 7825.-Brennan v. Keating, 150 N. W. 397. DISORDERLY HOUSE. §8 (Neb.) A city cannot lawfully permit the maintenance of houses of prostitution.-Cooper v. State, 150 N. W. 207. § 17 (Neb.) Evidence held to sustain a convic tion of leasing a house for the practice of prostitution and of knowingly permitting the same to be used for such purposes.-Cooper v. State, 150 N. W. 207. § 130 (Wis.) Evidence held insufficient to show cruel and inhuman treatment by either husband or wife entitling the other to a divorce.-Kopplin v. Kopplin, 150 N. W. 948. (F) Judgment or Decree. § 164 (Iowa) An application for a modifieation of an original divorce decree should be by supplemental petition.-Schlarb v. Schlarb, 150 N. W. 593. (G) Appeal. § 182 (Iowa) An appeal by a husband from a decree dismissing his petition for divorce does not prevent the court, pending appeal, from allowing attorney's fees and alimony and taxing the same as costs.-Main v. Main, 150 N. W. 590. (H) Fees and Costs. 192 (Iowa) The power of the court to tax attorney's fees as costs implies that the taxation shall be with reference to the value of the services.-Main v. Main, 150 N. W. 590. V. ALIMONY, ALLOWANCES, AND DISPOSITION OF PROPERTY. § 211 (Iowa) Allowance of alimony to a wife who is sued for a divorce rests in the discretion of the trial court.-Main v. Main, 150 N. W. 590. § 221 (Iowa) An order directing a husband suing for divorce to pay attorney's fees and suit money entered before filing of answer does not exhaust the jurisdiction of the court over allowance of suit money and attorney's fees.Main v. Main, 150 N. W. 590. § 223 (Iowa) Allowance of suit money and attorney's fees to a wife who is sued for a divorce rests in the discretion of the trial court.Main v. Main, 150 N. W. 590. § 245 (Iowa) A provision in a decree, modifying a decree of divorce, that a failure by the husband to pay any monthly installment of $50 shall authorize judgment against him for $7,800 cannot stand.-Schlarb v. Schlarb, 150 N. W. 593. § 286 (Iowa) The exercise of the court's discretion in allowing suit money, attorney's fees, and alimony to a wife who is sued for a divorce will not be disturbed in the absence of an abuse.-Main v. Main, 150 N. W. 590. VI. CUSTODY AND SUPPORT OF CHILDREN. § 299 (Iowa) An order that a divorced husband may not see his children oftener than once in six months, and then in the presence of a third person named by the wife, is a deprivation of the right to visit, and is unsustainable, except on the clearest proof.-Schlarb Schlarb, 150 N. W. 593. V. § 309 (Iowa) Under Code, § 3180, an increase for the support of children, awarded to a wife by a divorce decree, may only be made on proof of a substantial change in the circumstances of the parties.-Schlarb v. Schlarb, 150 N. W. 593. An increase of an allowance of $25 a month for support of minor children to $50 per month should be granted only on a very clear showing of a radical change in circumstances.-Id. $312 (Iowa) The court, on appeal from a decree modifying a divorce decree as to the custody of children, will assume that the court disposed of the motion on the statements therein and affidavits supporting it.-Schlarb v. Schlarb, 150 N. W. 593. § 36 (Minn.) On appeal to the district court under Gen. St. 1913, § 5589, in a county ditch proceeding, the propriety of diverting the wa ters of a meandered lake may be determined, but the court cannot determine the propriety of the county board's order establishing the ditch.-In re Mundwiler's Petition, 150 N. W. 209. On reversal of a county board's order in ditch proceedings because it provided for the draining of a meandered lake not subject to drainage, the board could proceed with the project under Gen. St. 1913, § 5531, except as to the lake. -Id. § 63 (Minn.) Evidence held insufficient to sustain a finding that defendant did not obstruct a ditch which plaintiff had a right to use.Schuette v. Sutter, 150 N. W. 622. Where defendant obstructed a ditch which plaintiff had a right to use, plaintiff was entitled to injunctive relief.-Id. obstructions from a ditch and for damages, In an action to compel defendant to remove held, that a judgment that defendant was enti tled to relief by specific performance of a parol agreement was erroneous.-Id. II. ASSESSMENTS AND SPECIAL TAXES. 874 (S.D.) Where drainage commissioners exceeded their jurisdiction in increasing the length of a drainage ditch and the size of tiling and increased the assessment, the objection must be settled at the time of assessments of benefits and expenses.-State v. Pound, 150 N. W. 287. $79 (S.D.) Under Drainage Law, § 6, relating to notice of hearing for equalizing benefits for a drain, a notice held sufficient, though not designating that a benefit to be equalized was a benefit to a highway.-State v. Pound, 150 N. W. 287. DRAMSHOPS. See Intoxicating Liquors. DRUNKARDS. § 21 (Wis.) A wife held not to have become a resident of Wisconsin merely because her husband came there and purchased land, so as to be entitled to dower in the land under St. 1913, See Intoxicating Liquors, § 293. DUE PROCESS OF LAW. § 2160.-Ekegren v. Marcotte, 150 N. W. 969. III. RIGHTS AND REMEDIES OF § 58 (Wis.) An antenuptial contract executed by a prospective wife alone is not within St. DURESS. See Bills and Notes, § 452. EASEMENTS. 1911, § 2170, and an election within the time See Dedication, § 2. § 116 (Iowa) A widow's dower or distributive share in one-third of the real estate, not sold on execution or judicial sale, given her by Code, § 3366, is not subject to decedent's debts, and is superior to a mechanic's lien filed after death.-G. J. Stewart & Co. v. Whicher, 150 N. W. 64. EJECTMENT. See Eminent Domain, § 268. I. RIGHT OF ACTION AND DE- § 9 (Neb.) Plaintiff in ejectment must plead and prove a legal title and right of possession. -Reams v. Sinclair, 150 N. W. 826. § 9 (Wis.) One who had been in peaceable possession under a claim of ownership, though under entry as a trespasser, was entitled to maintain ejectment against a subsequent trespasser or intruder.-Klooz v. Hood, 150 N. W. 441. A plaintiff in ejectment must depend on the strength of his own title, and not on the weakness of the title of his adversary.-Id. ELECTION. See Wills, §§ 781-794. ELECTION OF REMEDIES. ELECTIONS. See Intoxicating Liquors, § 27; Libel and I. RIGHT OF SUFFRAGE AND REGU- § 13 (Minn.) The commission charter of the city of St. Paul adopted in 1912, sustained as against the contention that by its educational features, both in themselves and in the manner of their adoption, it violates Const. art. 7, § 8, enfranchising women in educational matters.State v. City of St. Paul, 150 N. W. 389. IX. COUNT OF VOTES, RETURNS, § 236 (Wis.) To construe St. 1913, § 86, authorizing a recount, so as to prevent county and state canvasses from being completed within the time fixed by statute, would render it unconstitutional.-State v. State Board of Canvassers, 150 N. W. 542; Same v. Board of Canvassers of Milwaukee County, Id. 554. 259 (Wis.) The entire result of the county canvass of an election should be covered by a single decision and the result, as to state officers, be included in a single return.-State v. State Board of Canvassers, 150 N. W. 542; Same v. Board of Canvassers of Milwaukee County, Id. 554. The duty of the county canvassing board, independently of Laws 1911, c. 328, is purely ministerial.-Id. The county canvassing board must obtain possession of the district returns within the time specified.-Id. Under St. 1913, § 94e, the state board of canvassers must make its decision from the county returns mentioned in section 87, subsec. 1, and from such returns only.-Id. 8260 (Wis.) Laws 1911, c. 328 (St. 1913, § ELECTRICITY. See Constitutional Law, § 134. 84 (Mich.) A grant by the Legislature of right to use streets for distribution of electricity may be accepted by a company, while it has a franchise therefor from the city, without disclaiming user under the latter.-City of Lansing v. Michigan Power Co., 150 N. W. 250. Grant by Pub. Acts 1905, No. 264, to electric companies of right to use streets held to be at least for the life of a corporation accepting it. -Id. EMBARGO. See Carriers, § 99. EMBEZZLEMENT. See Criminal Law, § 823; Officers, § 27. § 31 (N.D.) An information held sufficient to charge embezzlement by a bailee in violation of Comp. Laws 1913, § 9934, though a participle was used instead of a verb to charge possession.-State v. Hoff, 150 N. W. 929. § 32 (N.D.) An information charging embezzlement by a bailee in violation of Comp. Laws 1913, § 9934, held sufficient as against an objection that it did not sufficiently charge relative to fiduciary relation and acting in a fiduciary capacity.-State v. Hoff, 150 N. W. 929. zlement by a bailee in violation of Comp. Laws § 33 (N.D.) An information charging embez1913, § 9934, need not allege demand.-State v. Hoff, 150 N. W. 929. That an information used the words "fraudu lently appropriate," instead of the statutory term "fraudulently convert," did not render it insufficient to charge embezzlement by a bailee in violation of Comp. Laws 1913, § 9934.-Id. EMINENT DOMAIN. II. COMPENSATION. Ground for Compensation. 86, subsecs. 1-4) does not authorize the continu- | (B) Taking or Injuring Property 84 ance of recount proceedings after the time prescribed by section 87, subsec. 1, for making county returns to the secretary of state, or at least after December 10th, when under section 94a the state board must enter upon its work without capacity to adjourn, especially in view of other statutory provisions and Const. art. 13, $1.-State v. State Board of Canvassers, 150 N. W. 542; Same v. Board of Canvassers of Milwaukee County, Id. 554. St. 1913, § 86, relative to proceedings for a recount, applies to all officers.-Id. St. 1913, § 86, cannot be so construed as to prevent making the county and state canvasses within the time required by law.-Id. § 265 (Wis.) The secretary of state and the state canvassing board should obtain county results by the time fixed for commencing to make the state canvass, and should complete the canvass, file their decision, and issue certificates of election within the statutory time.-State v. State Board of Canvassers, 150 N. W. 542; Same v. Board of Canvassers of Milwaukee County, Id. 554. 8102 (Mich.) A lot owner held not entitled to damages for the building on one of the streets on which his lot abutted, but at a distance from it, of a railroad depot, merely making communication with the lot less convenient.-Sioux City Seed & Nursery Co. v. Detroit & M. Ry. Co., 150 N. W. 841. III. PROCEEDINGS TO TAKE PROP- PENSATION. § 215 (Mich.) Disqualification of a juror in condemnation proceedings is ground for setting aside the judgment on appeal.-Sandusky Grain Co. v. Sanilac Circuit Judge, 150 N. W. 329. § 219 (Mich.) A colloquy between court and counsel held to show submission to the jury of the question of compensation for land within a street, in connection with other land sought to be condemned.-City of Detroit v. Gray, 150 N. W. 121. § 235 (Minn.) A notice held sufficient under Laws 1913, c. 345, authorizing the filing of a written objection in condemnation proceedings. -In re Seventh Street North in City of Minneapolis, 150 N. W. 398. § 238 (Minn.) An appeal to the district court from the award in condemnation proceedings, under Gen. St. 1913, c. 41, §§ 5395-5428, should be treated as an appeal in an ordinary civil action.-Minneapolis, St. P., R. & D. Electric Traction Co. v. Goodspeed, 150 N. W. 222. An appeal to the district court in condemnation proceedings, under Gen. St. 1913, c. 41, §§ 5395-5428, when limited to the issue of damages, may be dismissed without respondent's consent as provided for by section 7825.-Id. $238 (Minn.) Under Gen. St. 1913, § 5409, where that portion of the award of commissioners obligating condemnor to construct a cattle pass and culverts was not challenged, but the verdict and judgment on appeal in the district court did not refer to the conditions, they remained in force.-In re Minneapolis, St. P., R. & D. Electric Traction Co., 150 N. W. 906. § 241 (Minn.) That the judgment for damages had been paid held not to render it error to amend the judgment by incorporating in it conditions imposed by the commissioners as to the construction of a pass and culverts.-In re Minneapolis, St. P., R. & D. Electric Traction Co., 150 N. W. 906. § 262 (Mich.) A verdict, fixing the value of property taken for street purposes, will not be set aside on appeal, where, though lower than any sum fixed by respondent's witnesses, it was higher than any estimate of relator's witnesses.-City of Detroit v. Gray, 150 N. W. 121. IV. REMEDIES OF OWNERS OF ESTATES. See Deeds, $$ 128, 133; Dower; Executors and Administrators; Homestead, § 139; Husband and Wife, §§ 6, 205; Landlord and Tenant; Remainders; Tenancy in Common; Wills. ESTOPPEL. See Adverse Possession, § 112; Bailment, § 11; Banks and Banking, §§ 47, 169; Corporations, § 429; Homestead, § 122; Insurance. $ 378, 388, 392, 395, 641; Judgment, §§ 570721; Municipal Corporations, § 347; Pleading, 412; Taxation, § 538; Towns, § 15; Vendor and Purchaser, & 42; Wills, § 794. III. EQUITABLE ESTOPPEL. (A) Nature and Essentials in General. $57 (N.D.) Plaintiffs, who by the conduct of their agent had received a material benefit to the injury of an intervening bank, held estopped to take advantage thereof, unless they were in position to restore the bank to as favorable a position as it occupied before the transaction. $268 (Mich.) Where the court has jurisdic--McCaull v. Nichols, 150 N. W. 932. tion of the person and subject-matter in condemnation proceedings, ejectment will not lie for mere irregularities, but only if the proceeding is void. Sandusky Grain Co. v. Sanilac Circuit Judge, 150 N. W. 329. 8 274 (Mich.) Condemnation proceedings will not be enjoined on the ground of irreparable injury and anticipated and probable danger to the public.-Sandusky Grain Co. v. Sanilac Circuit Judge, 150 N. W. 329. Where it was claimed that condemnation proceedings were void because the judge and sheriff were disqualified, an objector held entitled to restrain the railroad company from taking possession of the street until further order of the court.-Id. EMPLOYERS. See Master and Servant. EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY ACTS. See Appeal and Error, §§ 171, 1062; Commerce, § 27; Death, §§ 31, 77; Master and Servant, §§ 250, 276, 284, 291; Trial, § 3212. EQUALIZATION. See Taxation, § 449. EQUITY. See Cancellation of Instruments; Estoppel; Injunction; Interpleader; Judgment, § 420; Mortgages, § 425; Partition; Quieting Title; Reformation of Instruments; Religious Societies, § 24; Specific Performance; Subrogation; Trusts. II. LACHES AND STALE DEMANDS. § 72 (Wis.) Under the doctrine of laches, a court of equity will not aid one negligent in asserting his rights, where the other party has been damaged by reason of the delay.Bur v. Bong, 150 N. W. 431. ERROR, WRIT OF. See Appeal and Error. ESCROWS. § 1 (N.D.) To constitute an "escrow" of a deed, there must be a pre-existing contract of sale, antedating the escrow agreement.-Seifert v. Lanz, 150 N. W. 568. $5 (N.D.) Where a deed is deposited in escrow without there being a pre-existing contract of sale, the negotiation is a mere "offer of sale," and the deed may be withdrawn.Seifert v. Lanz, 150 N. W. 568. § 62 (Iowa) Where lot owner claiming adjoining alley had made no improvements thereon, held, that there was no estoppel against the city.-Schultz v. Stringer, 150 N. W. 1063. (B) Grounds of Estoppel. $75 (Iowa) A wife permitting her husband to use her property under such circumstances as to justify his creditors in believing that it is his is estopped to assert title against the creditors.-Miller Watt & Co. v. Mercer, 150 N. W. 694. her property in her husband's possession as A wife held not estopped to assert title to against his creditors.-Id. 878 (Mich.) Defendant held not estopped from denying that the other party to a contract relating to the purchase of land was entitled only to simple interest on sums advanced.-Boeing v. Fordney, 150 N. W. 852. 878 (Minn.) Evidence held to show right of plaintiff to maintain drain through defendant's land by estoppel.-Schuette v. Sutter, 150 N. W. 622. EVICTION. See Landlord and Tenant, §§ 172-180. EVIDENCE. See Account Stated, § 19; Adverse Possession, |