LANDLORD AND TENANT.
Demise of vessel, see "Shipping," § 1.
Mining leases, see "Mines and Minerals," § 2.
§ 1. Terms for years.
Where a corporation is tenant under a lease, service of notice to quit upon its treasurer is a good service upon the corporation both at common law and under Gen. St. Minn. 1894, § 5199, which provides that, in an action against a corporation, service of summons may be made on its president, secretary, cashier, treasurer, a director, or managing agent.-Lindeke v. Associates Realty Co. (C. C. A.) 630.
*A lease for a long term construed, and held to give to the lessor the right to declare a forfeiture for breach of a covenant to build on the leased premises.-Lindeke v. Associates Realty Co. (C. C. A.) 630.
LEGISLATIVE POWER.
See "Constitutional Law," § 1.
LETTERS PATENT.
For inventions, see "Patents."
LIBEL AND SLANDER.
*A corporation can maintain an action to recover for pecuniary loss as the result of a libelous publication precisely as an individual could in a like situation and where the publication is libelous per se and calculated to injuriously affect plaintiff's business, special damages need not be alleged.-Union Refrigerator Transit Co. v. S. S. McClure Co. (C. C.) 623.
*A lessor having a right to declare a forfeiture of the lease, and who has served notice of such forfeiture, does not waive his right by the subsequent acceptance of rent from the lessee For mining, see "Mines and Minerals," § 2.
covering a period which will expire before he is entitled to re-enter under the terms of the lease. Lindeke v. Associates Realty Co. (C. C. A.) 630.
In Indian Country, see "Indians."
Liability of vessel owner for theft from pas-
senger, see "Shipping," § 4.
§ 1. Prosecution and punishment.
On trial for larceny the question was whether defendant stole some cattle or bought them of one R. without notice. There was evidence that defendant paid R. in currency and a draft payable to R.'s order, and that the latter sent the draft to the drawee directing him to place its proceeds in a certain bank to his credit. Held, that evidence that there was no method known to the banking institutions whereby such draft could be paid without the indorsement of the payee, was irrelevant and immaterial.-Sparks v. Territory of Oklahoma (C. C. A.) 371.
Effect of proceedings in bankruptcy, see "Bank ruptcy," § 3.
For salvage, see "Salvage," § 1.
LIFE ESTATES.
Rights of remaindermen held not affected by an attempted declaration of trust by the life tenants. Anderson v. Messinger (C. C. A.) 929.
LIMITATION OF ACTIONS,
Criminal prosecutions, see "Criminal Law," § 1
LIMITATION OF LIABILITY.
Of owner of vessel, see "Shipping," $§§ 4, 6.
*Under Rev. St. U. S. § 5356 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 3638], providing for the punishment of larceny, it is not necessary that an indictment allege the value of the stolen goods. Of duties, see "Customs Duties," § 3. Brown v. United States (C. C. A.) 975.
Of mining claim, see "Mines and Minerals,"
§ 1.
LOGS AND LOGGING.
1. Master's liability for injuries to
The injury of a railroad employé while en-
gaged in loading cars held to have been caused
by the negligence of the foreman who was
his fellow servant for which the company was
not liable.-Baltimore & O. R. Co. v. Brown
Construction in general of contract for sale of (C. C. A.) 24.
lumber, see "Sales," § 1.
*A mere foreman or gang boss is a fellow
servant of those working with or under him,
and for his defaults by which a fellow servant
is injured the master is not responsible, unless
Construction in general of contract for sale of, the duty as to which the default is made is an
see "Sales," § 1.
LUNATICS.
See "Insane Persons."
Warranties on sale of, see "Sales," § 2.
1. Subjects and purposes of relief.
*Writ of mandamus granted by the Circuit
Court of Appeals requiring the modification of
a decree entered on its mandate in bankruptcy
proceedings in the District Court to conform to
such mandate.-Ex parte Chicago Title & Trust
Co. (C. C. A.) 742.
§ 1. Creation, operation, and effect.
*The insurer of a sunken scow which made a
contract to have the same raised held to have
no authority_to_bind the vessel for payment.
-The Paul L. Bleakley (D. C.) 570.
2. Enforcement.
Libelant, which raised a sunken scow under
contract with the insurer, held barred by laches
from maintaining a suit to subject the vessel to
a lien therefor after the right of the owner to
sue the insurer had become barred under the
terms of the policy.-The Paul L. Bleakley (D.
C.) 570.
MARRIAGE.
See "Husband and Wife."
MARRIED WOMEN.
See "Husband and Wife."
MASTER AND SERVANT.
See "Work and Labor."
absolute duty of the master the performance
of which has been delegated to such foreman.
Baltimore & O. R. Co. v. Brown (C. C. A.) 24.
*The question of defendant's negligence held
one for the jury in an action for injury to a
servant.-Remington & Sherman Co. v. Blaz-
osseck (C. C. A.) 363.
A master held not chargeable with negligence
which rendered it liable for an injury to a tool
boy by falling from a stairway which was not
owned or controlled by defendant, while per-
forming an errand at the direction of the fore-
man.-American Bridge Co. v. Bainum (C. C.
A.) 367.
The duty of a master to provide a reasonably
safe place in which his servant shall work does
not extend to safeguarding the route of every
journey the servant may be required to make
in fetching and carrying, whether messages
or portable articles.-American Bridge Co. v.
Bainum (C. C. A.) 367.
*Where plaintiff knew that the only protec-
tion against his falling in the hold of a ship,
was a netting along the runway, he was bound
to use extraordinary care to see that the net-
ting was in place.-Northwestern S. S. Co.
v. Griggs (C. C. A.) 472.
*In an action for injuries to an employé on a
vessel by falling into the hold, plaintiff held
to have been guilty of contributory negligence.
-Northwestern S. S. Co. v. Griggs (C. C. A.)
*Where a master was called by a superior to
assist in a work outside of his regular employ-
ment, and subjected to danger from a defective
appliance of which he had no knowledge and by
which he was injured, the rules of fellow serv-
ants or assumed risk do not apply, but the su-
perior in respect to the condition of such ap-
pliance represents the master, who is responsible
for his negligence.-American Car & Foundry
Co. v. Brinkman (C. C. A.) 712.
*The negligence of a fellow servant will not
defeat an action for injuries if it is not the
sole cause of the accident.-The Hamilton (C.
C. A.) 724; The Saginaw, Id.
*Subordinate officers and crew of a vessel
drowned in a collision held not fellow servants
of the master, whose negligence contributed to
the injury. The Hamilton (C. C. A.) 724; The
Saginaw, Id.
*Point annotated. See syllabus.
Required by statute of frauds, see "Frauds,
Statute of," § 1.
Of cause of action in judgment, see "Judgment,"
§ 1.
MINES AND MINERALS.
Recovery of payment in consideration of as-
signment of ore lease, see "Payment," § 1.
§ 1. Public mineral lands.
The decision of a circuit court affirmed, hold-
ing that the evidence was insufficient to sustain
the burden of proof resting on adverse claim-
ants to show that any part of mining ground
sought to be patented by defendant was within
the boundaries of a claim as previously located
by plaintiffs and their grantors.-Porter v.
Tonopah North Star Tunnel & Development
Co. (C. C. A.) 385.
In an action to recover certain land as a
placer mining location, an instruction requir-
ing plaintiff to prove that the land would
yield a reasonable profit for the labor and
capital expended in working it in order to
render the land subject to mineral location.
held erroneous.-Cascaden v. Bartolis (C. C.
A.) 739.
The certificate of the location of a mining
claim held to create a presumption of the dis-
covery of mineral and of a valid location on an
application for a preliminary injunction in
an ejectment suit in which a subsequent locator
attacked the title of the prior locator of that
of his successor in interest.-Vogel v. Warsing
(C. C. A.) 949.
quantity of ore.-Cleveland-Cliffs Iron Co. v.
East Itasca Min. Co. (C. C. A.) 232.
Compensation of vendee on rescission of a
purchase of coal lands for fraud determined.-
Mather v. Barnes, Keighley & Greer (C. C.)
1000.
Ground for recovery of payment, see "Payment,"
§ 1.
Of judgment or order on appeal, see "Appeal
and Error," § 6.
MONEY RECEIVED.
Recovery of payment in general, see "Pay-
ment," § 1.
for the recovery of money deposited with de-
A complaint held to state a cause of action
fendants' bank for the payment of a portion
of the price of certain real estate, the contract
for the sale of which was never executed
because of the vendor's lack of title.-Schiffer
v. Anderson (C. C. A.) 457.
Of personal property, see "Chattel Mortgages."
§ 1. Foreclosure by action.
of a nonresident for the purpose of escap-
*That a mortgage was executed in the name
ing taxation to which it would have been
subject if executed in the name of the lender
held no defense to a suit by the mortgagee to
foreclose the same.-Waterbury v. McKinnon
(C. C. A.) 737.
*Where a location notice described a mining
claim as lying about a mile from Anvil Moun-
tain in a southeasterly direction, it was not fa-al to the mortgagee's debt, and was afterwards
*Where a mortgage was assigned as collater-
tally defective for failure to point out a par- foreclosed by the assignee, who purchased the
ticular portion of such mountain as the be- property under foreclosure decree, he acquired
ginning point.-Vogel v. Warsing (C. C. A.) the mortgagor's title, and did not hold as trus-
tee for the assignor.-Anderson v. Messinger
(C. C. A.) 929.
§ 2. Title, conveyances, and contracts
A contract for the exploration of ore lands
preliminary to the assignment of certain leases
held only to require an exploration so reason-
ably and fairly conducted in the usual way as
to determine with as much certainty as that
sort of exploration would permit, the extent of
the ore deposit.-Cleveland-Cliffs Iron Co. v.
East Itasca Min. Co. (C. C. A.) 232.
Contract for development of certain ore land
held only to require plaintiff to report the sub-
stance disclosed by the development and explora-
tion adopted by the persons to test the land.-
Cleveland-Cliffs Iron Co. v. East Itasca Min.
Co. (C. C. A.) 232.
A contract for the assignment of leases on ore
land held an agreement to pay a certain price
per gross ton for all ore discovered by completed
explorations reasonably and fairly made, and did
not contemplate the ascertainment of the actual
Relating to pleadings, see "Pleading," § 2.
For particular purposes or relief.
Direction of verdict in civil actions, see "Trial,"
§ 2.
Presentation of objections for review, see "Ap-
Striking out evidence, see "Criminal Law," § 3;
peal and Error," § 1.
"Trial," § 1.
MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS.
See "Schools and School Districts," § 1.
Specific performance of contract with, see
"Specific Performance;" § 1.
Street railroads, see "Street Railroads."
*Point annotated. See syllabus.
Of particular facts, acts, or proceedings not
judicial.
See "Copyrights," § 1.
Bribery, see "Bribery."
Embezzlement, see "Embezzlement."
Particular classes of officers.
See "Court Commissioners"; "Judges"; "Re-
ceivers."
Corporate officers, see "Corporations," § 2.
Municipal officers, see "Municipal Corpora-
tions," § 1.
OPINION EVIDENCE.
In civil actions, see "Evidence," § 6.
In criminal prosecutions, see "Criminal Law,"
§ 2.
Review of appealable orders, see "Appeal and
Error."
PARENT AND CHILD.
See "Guardian and Ward.”
PAROL EVIDENCE.
In civil actions, see "Evidence," § 5.
Character ground of jurisdiction, see "Courts,"
§ 3.
Death ground for abatement, see "Abatement
and Revival," § 1.
In equity, see "Equity," § 2.
On appeal or writ of error, see "Appeal and
Error," § 2.
§ 1. Actions for partition.
*Bare denial of complainant's title on in-
formation and belief in partition, held not to
require the court to stay the suit until title
has been established at law.-Carlson v. Sul-
livan (C. C. A.) 476.
*Where ouster is made by one tenant in com-
mon of his co-tenant, the remedy of the ousted
tenant is by ejectment to recover possession of
the individual moiety, and not by partition.-
Carlson v. Sullivan (C. C. A.) 476.
*Pleadings in a suit for partition of a min-
ing claim, held to present a cause triable in
equity under Alaska Code Civ. Proc. c. 43,
Location of mining claim, see "Mines and §§ 397, 398, 403, and hence it was error for the
Minerals," § 1.
Loss of baggage, see "Shipping," § 4.
court to dismiss the cause and remit plain-
tiff to his remedy by ejectment.-Forderer v.
Termination of tenancy, see "Landlord and Schmidt (C. C. A.) 480.
Tenant," § 1.
OBLIGATION OF CONTRACT.
Laws impairing, see "Constitutional Law," § 2.
Act of bankruptcy by firm, see "Bankruptcy,"
§ 1.
*Point annotated. See syllabus.
§ 1. Rights and liabilities as to third | is not further limited by a subsequent lapse or
forfeiture of a part of such term by reason of
the failure to comply with a condition subse-
quent, such as the payment of additional fees at
stated intervals.-Victor Talking Mach. Co. v.
Talk-o-Phone Co. (C. C.) 534; Same v. Leeds
& Catlin Co., Id.
Under Rev. St. § 4887 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901,
p. 3382], the prior patenting in a foreign coun-
try of a minor part of a broad or basic inven-
tion does not so affect the whole that the
expiration of the foreign patent terminates the
whole of a United States patent covering both
such minor part and the broad main invention.-
Victor Talking Mach. Co. v. Talk-o-Phone Co.
Construction in general of contract for sale (C. C.) 534; Same v. Leeds & Catlin Co., Id.
of patented product, see "Sales," § 1.
§ 1. Subjects of patents.
Design patents are granted for appearance
and not with reference to mechanical useful-
ness.-West Disinfecting Co. v. Frank (C. C.)
388.
*Granulated coffee is not patentable as a
product of manufacture merely because the
process used may produce granules which are
more uniform and attractive in appearance than
those otherwise produced.-Baker v. F. A. Dun-
combe Mfg. Co. (C. C. A.) 744.
*Applying an old process to a new use is not
invention. Baker v. F. A. Duncombe Mfg.
Co. (C. C. A.) 744.
*An inventor, having grasped an idea and
put it in mechanical form, may not wait to
secure a monopoly on the broad thought until
everything in the nature of mere accessory im-
provement that makes it commercially better
has been worked out and perfected.-Universal
Adding Mach. Co. v. Comptograph Co. (C. C.
A.) 981.
§ 3. Persons entitled to patents.
Complainant held under the evidence not en-
titled to the issuance to him as the true in-
ventor of a patent for the subject-matter of
claims 1 and 2 of the Sendelbach patent, No.
651,276, for a wooden center for a hub.-
Gillette v. Sendelbach (C. C. A.) 756.
§ 4. Applications, and proceedings
thereon.
*Where the question which of two applicants
for a patent for the same invention was the
true inventor depends on questions of fact,
the court, in an action brought under Rev. St.
§ 4915 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 3392], by the
unsuccessful applicant to compel an issuance
of the patent to him, must be very clearly sat-
isfied that the decision of the Patent Office
tribunals between the two was erroneous be-
fore it will be justified in reversing the same.
-Gillette v. Sendelbach (C. C. A.) 758.
Under Rev. St. § 4887 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901,
p. 3382], where the legal term of a prior foreign
patent appears on its face at the time of the
issuance of a United States patent for the
same invention the latter is limited thereby, but
A fine imposed for contempt of court in
violating an injunction against infringement of
a patent.-Frank v. Bernard (C. C.) 137.
*On a reference to a master for an accounting
for infringement of a patent which has been sus-
tained and held infringed by the court, the whole
question of infringement is in general open for
consideration except as concluded by the decree,
and the complainant is not confined to the particu-
lar structures passed upon by the court and
held to infringe.-Walker Patent Pivoted Bin
Co. v. Miller (C. C.) 249.
Where on a reference for an accounting as to
damages for infringement of a patent, the mas-
ter by his rulings limits the scope of the inquiry.
the matter may properly be presented to the
court for decision by a motion for instructions
to the master. Walker Patent Pivoted Bin Co.
v. Miller (C. C.) 249.
*A substantial equivalent of a patented de-
vice or means which performs the same func-
tion does not avoid infringement because it
may perform an additional function.-Universal
Brush Co. v. Sonn (C. C.) 517.
*The Metzger patent No. 489,682 for an elec-
tric lamp socket, claims 5 and 7, held valid
and infringed. Claim 6 held void for lack of
Electric Co. V.
invention.-Edison General
Crouse-Hinds Electric Co. (C. C.) 539.
*A defendant adjudged in contempt for vio-
lation of a preliminary injunction against in-
fringement of a patent.-Robinson v. S. & B.
Lederer Co. (C. C.) 993.
§ 7. Decisions on the validity, construc-
tion, and infringement of partic-
The King patents Nos. 389,817 and 507.439 for
portable boats construed and held not infringed.
-Winans v. Perring (C. C. A.) 133.
The Parcelle patent No. 463,704 for an electric
motor and dynamo held void for lack of patent-
able invention.-General Electric Co. v. Bullock
Electric Mfg. Co. (C. C.) 552.
The Weissenthanner patent No. 483,033 for a
jar construed and held not infringed.-Phoenix
Cap Co. v. Reiss (C. C.) 387.
The Reist patent No. 508,637 for an armature
core held not anticipated, valid, and infringed.-
*Point annotated. See syllabus.
|