Page images
PDF
EPUB

creditor on the dismissal of his action, and as to the terms under which he will surreada
gave to the second attaching creditor the su- his interest in the land to the railroad copper
perior right to the funds in the hands of the for its right of way.-Haynes v. Tacone, e
clerk.-Tootle v. Miner, (Kan.) 34 P. 401. & G. H. R. Co., (Wash.) 34 P. 922.
Bond for release of property.

Liability for negligence.
6. In an action on a bond given to secure 2. In an action by an attorney to rerte
release of attached property, conditioned for for professional services, defendant cic
liability in case judgment was rendered against damages for incompetency and negligence, er
defendant in attachment, a finding that a judg. there was evidence that he employed plati
ment was not rendered is not warranted where, to prosecute certain actions to judgment ir:
in the record of the attachment suit subsequent fixed sum in each case, and that plaigtis su
to a judgment of nonsuit, appears a judgment discharged before judgment for negligence e
for plaintiff therein, as to the legality of which incompetency, in failing to file lis pendes
there is no evidence, there being a presumption two foreclosure suits. Held, that evidence that
in its favor.-Moore v. Mott, (Cal.) 34 P. 315. plaintiff explained to defendant the efect

7. The lien of an attachment is not de filing and failure to file such notices, and t*
stroyed by the delivery of the property to the probable expense, and that defendant sa be
owner on his furnishing a delivery bond, and did not want to spend the money for in
if the officer, after surrendering it, seizes it un- them, was admissible.-Hinckley v. Krug, tai
der other attachments, it is subject to disposi- 34 P. 118.
tion under the lien of the first attachment, and 3. In such case it is not error to exelpler.
the sureties on the delivery bond are relieved idence that part of the property covered te
from liability thereon by such resumption of of the mo ages plaintiff was employed
possession by the officer. -Schneider v. Walling- close was conveyed by the mortgagor bein
ford, (Colo. App.) 31 P. 1109.

but the deeds were not recorded until after the
Judgment and findings.

foreclosure suit was commenced, where it a
8. As Code 1887, c. 6, authorizing an ac- pears that the remaining property sold to
tion aided by attachment on a debt not due in enough to satisfy defendant's judgment.-H. 9
certain cases, permits defendant to traverse the ley v. Krug, (Cal.) 34 P. 118.
atlidavit, and provides that, if plaintiff fails to damages on account of negligence, in the s

4. A client canuot recover of his attor
substantiate the cause alleged, the attachment
shall be dissolved, and the action dismissed, a

sence of any injury to the client caused by
judgment for plaintiff on a trial by the court, such, negligence.-Hinckley v. Krug, (can 34

P. 118.
where the affidavit has been traversed, cannot
be sustained unless there is a finding on the Misconduct.
facts alleged as ground for the attachment.- 5. It is not unprofessional conduct for :
Woods v. Tanquary, (Colo. App.) 34 P. 737. attorney to sue a just claim against & DoDr S-
Claim of preferred lien by laborers

dent, and serve summons by publication, wher
Dismissal by plaintiff.

employed to do so, with the hope that puis!

the defendant therein will pay the judgment
9. An attaching creditor may dismiss his obtained, on its being sent to the place wher
action and release the attachment before sale he resides, though such attorney knows such
without being liable to laborers who have served action cannot be maintained, for want of juris
labor claim notices therein, under 1 Hill's Code, diction.-Hinckley v. Krug, (Cal.) 34 P. 118
$ 3124, allowing laborers, in all cases of attach-
ment,' execution, and similar writs, having compensation of attorney.
claims against defendant, to give notice thereof 6. Where an attorney advised his ciest.
at any time before actual sale of the property, in an action against a nonresident, that serti
declaring them preferred claims, and providing by publication was good, and a valid judzren
that the officer shall pay them out of the pro- could be obtained, such attorney cannot reum
ceeds of the sale, and providing, further, in for services rendered therein. – Hinckley !
case the claims are disputed, for actions, in Krug, (Cal.) 34 P. 118.
which case the officer is required to retain suffi- 7. In an action by an attorney to recove
cient of the proceeds to await their determina- for professional services where part of the
tion.- Wells v. Columbia Nat. Bank, (Wash.) services for which plaintiff seeks to recorer 10-
34 P. 160.

sisted in examining the title to a lot, it is er
Intervention.

ror to exclude evidence that, through the ad
10. Code 1881, c. 33, directs that, when rice of plaintiff that the title was clear, de
property attached on a writ issued in another compelled to redeem it from a prior tax liza-

fendant purchased the lot, and was afterwards
county is claimed by a third person, he shall Hinckley v. Krug, (Cal.) 34 P. 118.
file his affidavit and bond with the sheriff, who
shall return them to the clerk of the county
where the property was seized, and said clerk

Autrefois Acquit and Convict.
shall docket the claim as a cause for trial.
Wild, that the sheriff's failure to return the af: See “Criminal Law,” 9–11.
fidavit could not deprive the proper court of
jurisdiction, nor the attaching creditors of their

Award.
right to an adjudication. - State v. Superior See “Arbitration and Award."
Court of Mason County, (Wash.) 34 P. 151.
ATTORNEY AND CLIENT.

BAIL.
Argument of counsel, see "Criminal Law," 22- In criminal cases-Bond on appeal.
24; “Trial," 8, 9.

1. The supreme court has no authority to
Attorney's fees, liability of state, see “States reduce as excessive the amount of the ap ka
and State Officers," 3, 4.

bond fixed by the trial court in a prosecution
- on foreclosure, see "Mortgages." 8.

for manslaughter.-State v. Gile, (Wash.) 34 P.
provision in note, see "Negotiable Instru- 151.
ments," 1.

Liability on bond.
Authority of attorney.

2. It is no defense for the sureties on &
1. An attorney, employed by a railroad bail bond that the information was insufici it-
company to represent it on the trial of a partic ly verified, or that the arrest of the prized
ular cause for the condemnation of a right of on a warrant issued on such information 818
way, has no authority to enter into any contract illegal.-State v. Sureties of Krohne, (WF0.) 34
with a third person, not a party to the action, P. 3.

3. The sureties on a criminal recognizance | National banks-Contracts.
for the appearance of a defendant, and to 5. A national bank has power to take an
abide the judgment of the court, and not depart assignment of a mortgage on land to secure a
without leave, are discharged from further lia- loan made at the time of the assignment.-
bility when the defendant has duly appeared, First Nat. Bank v. Andrews, (Wash.) 34 P.
and received sentence, and thereafter has of: 913; Young v, Same, Id.
fered and submitted himself to the sheriff, to
be taken into custody under the sentence im-
posed by the court.-Jackson v. State, (Kan.) 34

Best and Secondary Evidence.
P. 744.

See "Evidence," 3, 4.
Bailment.
See “Banks and Banking;" "Carriers;" “De

Bills and Notes.
posit in Court;" "Innkeepers;" "Pledge."

See "Negotiable Instruments."
Liability for moneys lost by failure of bank,
see "Office and Officer," 8.

Blanks.
Ballots.

In bond, filling, see "Bonds."
See "Elections and Voters," 7.

In deeds, filling, see "Deed."
Bankruptcy.

Board.
See “Assignment for Benefit of Creditors;” “In- of county commissioners, see "Counties," 4.
solvency."

Of trade, see "Inspection.”
BANKS AND BANKING.

Bona Fide Purchasers.
Authority of president and cashier.

Of negotiable paper, see "Negotiable Instru-
1. The president and cashier of a bank

ments,” 3-5.
have no authority, by virtue of their office, to
sell property belonging to the bank.-Greena-

BONDS.
walt v. Wilson, (Kan.) 34 P. 403.

See, also, “Principal and Surety."
Special remedy provided for winding For release of property attached, see "Attach-
up affairs-Bank commissioners.

ment." 6, 7.
2. Bank Commissioners' Act March 30, Injunction bond, see "Injunction," 11, 12.
1878, provides for the examination of all banks Of contractor, see “Mechanics' Liens,” 30.
by commissioners appointed therefor. Section On appeal, see “Appeal," 15-17, 107, 108.
11 of such act, as amended by St. 1887, p. 90, in criminal cases, see "Bail."
provides that if the bank commissioners find
that any such corporation has violated its char- Authority of obligee to fill in blanks.
ter, or is conducting business in an unsafe 1. The attorney for an attachment debtor
manner, and refuses to discontinue its illegal presented to defendants for signature as sure-
practices, the attorney general may bring suit ties a redelivery bond, blank as to the specific
in the proper court to prohibit the transaction description of the property attached and its
of further business, and to wind up its affairs. value. Defendants signed the bond and justi-
Section 21 provides that all acts are repealed fication annexed, and gave the paper to the at-
in so far as they are inconsistent with the act. torney, who signed the jurat as notary. He
Insolvent Act 1880, $ 8, provides that an ad- thereafter filled in the blanks, and delivered
judication of insolvency may be made for the bond. Held, that defendants had made
causes enumerated therein on the petition of him their agent to fill the blanks, and were
five or more creditors whose demands amount estopped to deny his authority. – Palacios v.
in the aggregate to not less than $500; and Brasher, (Colo. Šup.) 34 P. 251.
section 25 requires the assignee, "as speedily

2. When sureties, sign an official bond,
as possible, to convert the estate, real and per- which is blank as to the penalty, and permit it
sonal, into money. Held, that the insolvent to pass from their hands in that condition, they
act is superseded by the bank commissioners are estopped to claim that it was afterwards
act as far as banking corporations are concern-

filled up without their authority. - Rose V.
ed, and that an adjudication of insolvency Douglass Tp., (Kan.) 34 P. 1046.
against a banking corporation, and the appoint-
ment of a receiver therefor, would not lie on
the petition of creditors therefor.-People v.

BOUNDARIES.
Superior Court, (Cal.) 34 P. 492,

3. A contention that the sole object of the Conflict between field notes and monu.
bank commissioners' act is visitation and a re-

ments.
port to the attorney general by the commission- 1. While the corners of a survey as actual.
ers, and that there is no suggestion therein for ly established and marked on the ground by the
the sequestration of assets, is untenable; sec. United States government surveyors control the
tion 11 of such act further providing that if the designation of such corners in the plats or field
court shall consider it unsafe for the corpora- notes, yet the presumption is that the corners
tion to continue to transact business, and that have been established at the places indicated by
it is insolvent, an injunction shall be issued, such field notes; and the proof that the actual
and thereupon such proceedings shall be taken establishment was different must be clear and
against the corporation "as may be decided up- convincing, where the actual location as claimed
on by its creditors,” and sections 18 and 19 does not accord with the section lines in ad.
authorizing the commissioners to maintain ac- joining sections, and will establish the claim in
tions in the name of the people, under the an irregular shape.-Cadeau v. Elliott, (Wash.)
court's direction. — People v. Superior Court, 34 P. 916.
(Cal.) 34 P. 492.
4. The remedies provided by the two acts

Location of corner Following sur-
are not cumulative, nor the powers conferred veyor's footsteps.
by the bank commissioners' act auxiliary to 2. In order to locate an intermediate post
those conferred by the insolvent act, the object in a survey of land, which was run also by
of the bank commissioners' act being to provide courses and distances, the footsteps of the sur-
an entirely different scheme for winding up the veyor should be followed, instead of taking a
business of a banking corporation.-People v. reverse course.-Blackburn v. Nelson, (Cal.) 34
Superior Court, (Cal.) 34 P. 492.

P. 775.

[ocr errors][ocr errors]

a

Lake-Meander line.

The pipe was put in evidence, but there un
3. In an action to recover possession of testimony as to where it was found. Bed the
land it appeared that plaintiffs owned land the evidence did not justify an instruction sa
bounded by the meander line of a lake as first to the effect of possession of property recer
surveyed by the government in 1855; that the stolen. -People v. Abbott, (Cal.) 34 P. 50)
waters of the lake receded, and left the land 4. It is error to charge that the posseen
in dispute lying between the present and orig- of stolen property soon after the taking,
inal meander line of the lake; and that de- not sufficient to justify a conviction, is er
fendant took possession of and built a house ty circumstance," and that defendant a
on the land in 1879, and has ever since resided bound to explain the possession in order to
there. Defendant claimed, and witnesses tes- move its effect, as this invades the provis
tified, that the land first settled on by him was the jury.-People v. Abbott, (Cal.) 34 P. 50
an island, separated from plaintiffs' land by
water several feet deep, and was part of the
public domain. Several witnesses supported

Cancellation.
plaintiffs' claim that no such island ever ex-
isted, and the plat of the original survey of the Of contracts, see "Equity,” 5-9.
township showed none. Held, that the evidence
was sufficient to justify a verdict for defend-
ant as to the facts in issue.-Moore v. Brown-

CARRIERS.
field, (Wash.) 34 P. 199.

See, also, “Railroad Companies."
Evidence.
4. Under a deed purporting to convey a

Limiting liability.
certain number of feet along a street commen-

1 A railroad cannot, in consideration of
cing at a certain point, only that number of reduced rate, exempt itself from all liabis
feet passed by the deed, and therefore evidence of a carrier of live stock, not resulting tre
that the grantor, in measuring off the land defective trucks, wheels, or axles.-Cajoa Pee
granted, measured more than that number of Ry. Co. v. Rainey, (Colo. Sup.) 34 P. 90
feet, is incompetent to show that more than

Live-stock shipments
the number of feet stated passed by the deed.

Negligence of
-Hogins v. Boggs, (Cal.) 34 P. 653.

shipper.
5. On the question of the location of a 2. The defect in a car furnished to trans
point called for in a patent and survey, the port horses, that the side slats are so far ages.
court may consider the field notes and descrip- as to allow horses to get their feet throue
tion in the patent of an adjoining tract, the them, is not so apparent to the shipper 1994
boundaries of the two tracts being coincident ing his horses on the car as to convict bis
for a distance of several miles, and both hav- negligence. — Union Pac. Ry. Co. . Raine.
ing been surveyed by the same_surveyor at (Colo. Sup.) 34 P. 986.
about the same time.-Adair v. White, (Cal.)
34 P. 338.

Carriage of passengers Who are paie
Brokers.

sengers.

3. Where 4 person, believing he h23 !
See "Factors and Brokers."

right to do so, rides on a freight train with be

consent of the conductor in charge, and, but
Burden of Proof.

so riding, is injured through the negligence et

the trainmen, the company is liable to him as
See “Evidence," 2.

a passenger, though such train be one bist.
by the rules of the company, was not allora

to carry passengers.-- Everett v. Oregoa SL
BURGLARY.

& U. N. Ry. Co., (Utah,) 31 P. 289.
What constitutes offense.

Injuries to passengers.
1. A buggy house "in which goods, wares,

4. In an action by a passenger against :
merchandise, and other valuable things are kept stage company for personal injuries received
and deposited” is a "building" in which burglary from the upsetting of a stage in coming do
may be committed, within the meaning of Gen. a mountain road, it appeared that one of te
St. 1889, c. 31, 8 68.-State v. Garrison, (Kan.) horses had been inclined to run away; that the
34 P. 751.

road was muddy and slippery; that the borse
Proof of corpus delicti.

were going at "a slow jog," when they sa
2. In a burglary case it appeared that one yards before the driver regained control; thus

frightened by a landslide; that they ras 19
evening a storekeeper had in his safe in the flying mud and slush made it hard for be dis
store certain money; that when he and his er to see, and tended to frighten the bor:
clerks left for the night, no one was there, and and that the horses were going in a trot,
the doors were locked and windows closed; they were so frightened by another slide thi:
that neither of them returned until the next the driver lost control, and they ran away. 2:
morning; that the storekeeper had not author- upset the stage. Held, that there was erit.
ized any one to enter the store during the night, for the jury as to whether defendant failed te
and it could not be entered except through the
doors or windows; and that in the morning the Pacific Coast Stage Co., (Cal.) 34 P. Sisi

provide suitable horses and driver.-Kegh: s.
money was gone from the safe, and apparently

5. In an action against a cablear me
a window had been raised during the night.
Held, that the corpus delicti was established.- pany for injuries received in alighting frons

car alleged to have been prematurely staret.
State v. Munson, (Wash.) 34 P. 932.

after instructing the jury that common cartier
Instructions.

of passengers must use such vigilance and fore
3. In a burglary case it appeared that a sight as they can, under the circumstances. in
Chinaman's trunk and pipe were stolen from

view of the character and mode of converance
the burglarized building. There was evidence adopted, to prevent accidents, it was not i
that two persons carried a “China trunk” from proper to instruct that "it was the defendant's
the lot on which the building was situated business to know, before starting up the a:.
about the time the crime was committed; that whether passengers getting off or on the es:
defendant and others were seen with such a were in a position to be injured, and it poc
trunk about that time; and that such China- be negligence to start the car suddenly, unde
man's trunk was found open two days after- such circumstances, without exercising etes
wards, a considerable distance from the build- precaution for the safety of those who nebo
ing. There was no evidence that a “China be getting off or on.”—Tobin v. Omnibus Cabe
trunk” is any different from any other trunk. Co., (Cal.) 34 P. 124.

[merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

Carriage of passengers — Contributory | perior court has no jurisdiction to review such
negligence of passengers.

proceedings on certiorari, though the time lim-

ited for appeal has expired before certiorari is
6. In an action against a street-car.com- brought. ---Gregory v. Dixon, (Wash.) 34 P. 212.
bany for personal injuries, plaintiff claimed,
ind the evidence tended to prove, that a car view contempt proceedings on certiorari.-State

3. The supreme court of Montana can re-
vas started while she was alighting therefrom, v. Fourth Judicial District Court, (Mont.) 34
while defendant claimed, and gave evidence P. 39.
co show, that the car was started before plain-

4. An order for payment of temporary ali-
iff left her seat, and that she tried to get off
while the car was in motion. Held, that an in mony, being appealable, and such appeal, with
struction making the defense of contributory the enforcement of the order, certiorari will not

stay bond, furnishing a complete remedy against
negligence dependent on whether defendant

lie to review the action of the court in commit-
ould have guarded against such negligence was ting defendant for contempt in disobeying the
endered harmless by subsequent instructions
:hat the verdict must be for the defendant if order; the provision of Const. art. 8, § 3, that
the injuries were caused either solely by plain- writs of certiorari in proceedings for contempt

the justices of the supreme court may issue
iff's negligence, or, jointly and concurrently, by in the district court, not being intended to ap-
he negligence of plaintiff and defendant or its ply where there is remedy by appeal. – In re
servants, and that if plaintiff, knowing the car Finkelstein, (Mont.) 34 P. 847.
was in motion, chose to run her chances, and
get off by stepping directly out from the car,
he must abide the risks she took.-Tobin v.

Challenge.
mnibus Cable Co., (Cal.) 34 P. 124,

See "Jury," 9.
Liability for passengers' effects.
7. In an action against a sleeping-car com-

Change of Possession.
pany for loss by a passenger of his coat while See "Fraudulent Conveyances;" "Sale," L.
in bis berth at night, the presumption of neg-

ligence on the part of defendant arising from
Szuch loss is rebutted by the uncontradicted evi-

Change of Venue.
dence of the car porter that he was on duty, See “Venue in Civil Cases,” 3.
and engaged in watching the car, through the
night, till after the loss.-Pullman Palace Car

Character.
Co. v. Freudenstein, (Colo. App.) 34 P. 578.

8. A railroad company is not bound, as a Evidence of, see “Criminal Law," 41.
part of its contract to transport a passenger,
who is employed as a traveling salesman, to
carry as his personal baggage a case of sam- CHATTEL MORTGAGES.
ple merchandise belonging to his employers; and
where it receives and checks such case without See, also. “Fraudulent Conveyances.”
knowledge of its ownership or contents, a part Liability of sheriff, see “Sheriffs and Consta-

of which is afterwards stolen from its baggage bles," 8.
* room without negligence on its part, it is not
liable to the owners.-Southern Kan. Ry. Co.

Validity.
V. Clark, (Kan.) 34 P. 1054.

1. A mortgage of a stock of goods was

filed as soon as made, and the mortgagees'
CARRYING WEAPONS.

agents, who occupied the other side of the same

building as the mortgagor, took possession, and
By officers.

put in charge a man who hired the mortgagor

to help him, as clerk. New books were opened,
Sheriffs and constables have not the ab- and all moneys received, after payment of run-
solute right, because of their office, to carry ning expenses, were applied on the mortgage
Sweapons at all times, since Act 1887, c. 30, debt. The mortgagor's name on the window
§ 10. provides that sheriffs, constables, and oth-

was not erased. Held, that there was a change
er officers may carry weapons in the legal dis- of possession, as against subsequently attach-
charge of the duties of their respective offices, ing creditors.-In re Fisher, (Or.) 34 P. 1024;
when the same may be necessary, but it shall Koehler v. McCamant, Id.
be for the court or jury to decide from the evi-
dence whether such carrying of weapons was

2. Under Code, g 776, subd. 40, providing
necessary or not, and for an improper carrying ble of immediate delivery which is not filed or

that every mortgage of personal property capa-
or using deadly weapons by an oflicer, he shall

recorded shall be presumptively fraudulent as to
be punished as other persons, are punished.”-
Guyse v. Territory, (N. M.) 34 P. 295.

the mortgagor's creditors unless accompanied by
immediate delivery and followed by an imme-

diate change of possession of the mortgaged
CERTIORARI.

property, the possession of the mortgagee, where

his mortgage is not recorded, must be exclusive,
Review on, see “Contenipt," 2.

and accompanied with such outward acts of
When lies.

ownership as to apprise the public that the
1. Code Civil Proc. $ 323, provides for a

property has changed hands; and a joint pos-
writ of certiorari when an inferior court has session with the mortgagor is not sufficient.-
exceeded its jurisdiction, and there is no ap-

Peirce v. Kelly, (Or.) 34 P. 963.
peal, nor any adequate remedy: Const, art. 5, the mortgagor to remain in possession and sell

3. A mortgage of merchandise, permitting
$ 23, provides that a writ of error shall lie in the usual course of business, paying the pro-
from the supreme court to every final judgment ceeds to the mortgagee till the debt is extin-
of the county court. Held, that a writ of cer-
tiorari should not issue for the review by a dis- guished, is rendered void against creditors by
trict court of a judgment rendered by a county tain from the proceeds a small allowance for

a parol agreement that the mortgagor may re-
court within its jurisdiction, and from which the support of his family. – Wile v. Butler,
there was no appeal to the district court, un- (Colo. App.) 34 P. 1110.
der Gen. St. $$ 500), 501, since there was an
adequate remedy by writ of error from the su- Description of property.
preme court.-Union Pac. Ry. Co. v. Bowler, 4. The return of the mortgagor's assignee,
(Colo. App.) 34 P. 910.

to whom the stock of mortgaged goods was turn-
2. Since Gen. St. § 784, provides that the ed over by consent, showing that he sold inore
proceedings of the county superintendent of articles of some kinds than were described in
schools organizing school districts may be ap- the mortgage, does not show that the descrip-
pealed to the county commissioners, the su- tion in the mortgage was inadequate as against

subsequently attaching creditors, there being

Collateral Security.
no averment or proof that the mortgagor had
any goods other than those described in the See “Pledge."
mortgage. — Inre Fisher, (Or.) 34 P. 1024;
Koehler v. McCamant, Id.

Collection.
Release--Substitution of other security. Of taxes, see "Taxation,” 9–14.

5. Though a contract for a pledge, by recit-
ing that it is given in lieu of a certain chattel
mortgage, shows an intention that it shall take

COLLEGES AND UNIVERSI-
the place of the chattel mortgage, it does not,

TIES.
in the absence of the delivery of the articles
thereby agreed to be pledged, release the chat- State university-Board of regents.
tel mortgage; Civil Code, $ 2988, providing that Const. art. 11, $ 7, requires the memben
no pledge is valid till the property is delivered of board of regents of the state university o de
to the pledgee.-Irwin v. McDowell, (Cal.) 34 "elected," and Act March 19, 1891, protica
P. 708.

that "the board shall consist of three elecure
Seizure by mortgages Liability to

members, as now provided by law, and of "be

governor and attorney general, who shall be
mortgagor.

officio members of the board." Held, that is
6. Where the holder of a chattel mortgage, act does not inaugurate a new system of &
under his mortgage, takes possession of a part ernment for the university, but merely increase
of the personal property mortgaged, but makes the number of regents, and that the attenza
no sale or disposition thereof, as prescribed by general in office at the time of the passage
the statute, he is liable to the mortgagor for the act is not entitled to act as a memte!
the actual value of the same, at the time and the board ex officio, since the act does not
place of taking possession thereof.-Miller v. the existence of an emergency at the time of :3
McElwain, (Kan.) 34 P. 396.

passage which requires the induction of the is

creased number into office prior to their elecom
Title of mortgagee after default.

by the people. State v. Irwin, 5 Ver. 121. ad
7. Possession by a chattel mortgagee after State v. Arrington, 4 P. 735, 18 Nev. 412, foi
the maturity of his debt does not vest in him a lowed. --State v. Torreyson, Nev.) 34 P. STU
legal title which is subject to attachment.
Voorbies v. Hennessy, (Wash.) 34 P. 931.

Collusion.
Cherokee Nation.

In obtaining decree of divorce, see "Divorce."

3-5.
See "Indians."

Color of Title.
Children.

See “Adverse Possession," 4; "Public Lands."

15.
See "Guardian and Ward."

Commissioner.
City.

Bank commissioners, see "Banks and Bans-

ing," 24.
See “Municipal Corporations."

Common Carrier.
Civil Law.

See “Carriers."
Verbal land contract, see "Vendor and Pur-
chaser," 1.

Community Property.
Claim and Delivery.

See "Husband and Wife,” 6-9.
See “Replevin."

Compensation.
Claims.

Of attorney, see "Attorney and Client," 6. 7.
Against decedent's estate, see "Executors and

Complaint.
Administrators,” 7-9.

See "Pleading,” 4-6.
CLERK OF COURT.

COMPROMISE.
Certificate by deputy to affidavit, see “Affida- See, also, “Payment;” “Release and Dis

charge.
Judicial power, see "Constitutional Law,” 5.

Effect of offer as admissions, see "Evidence," &
Liability for money lost by failure of bank, see
"Office and Officer," 8.

Compromise as consideration.

The compromise by a wife of a suit for
Powers-To adjourn court.

divorce against her husband, and her a basdot
When the judge is not present at the ment of her alleged right of homestead in be
time fixed by law for the holding of a term of property, is a valid consideration for a buri
court, the clerk of the court cannot, in the ab- gage executed by the husband in her favor te
sence of statutory authority, adjourn the court secure a note.-McClure v. McClure, (Cal.) 34
to a future day.-In re Terrill, (Kan.) 34 P. P. 822.
457; In re McClaskey, Id. 459.

Conclusion of Law.
Cloud on Title.

See “Pleading," 2.
See “Quieting Title.”

Condemnation Proceedings.
Collateral Attack.

See "Eminent Domain."
See "Judgment," 25–27.

Condition.
Effect of decision of secretary of interior, see
"Public Lands," 18.

In policy, see "Insurance," 1, 2

vit,"

[merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors]
« PreviousContinue »