dence, and not to be disturbed.-Doolittle v. Pa-
cific Coast Safe & Vault Works, 154 P. 753.

(E) Torts.

491 (Wyo.) Corporations are liable for ultra
vires torts.-Stock growers' Bank of Wheatland
v. Gray, 154 P. 593.

(F) Civil Actions.

applied by the directors of the selling corpora-
tion.-Id.

Where a corporation buys all the property of
another for full value and without fraud, notice
to the purchasing corporation that the selling
corporation is insolvent is not notice of the
directors' intent to misapply the purchase mon-
ey.-Id.

XI. DISSOLUTION AND FORFEITURE
OF FRANCHISE.

499 (Wash.) Payment of corporation license
fee required by Rem. & Bal. Code, § 3715, after
trial and before argument for new trial or en-617 (Wash.) An assignment of its indem-
try of findings and decree, is sufficient compli- nity policy by an insolvent coal company the
ance with the statute to authorize suit by cor- name of which had been stricken by the sec-
poration especially where defendant took judg- retary of state from the public rolls for fail-
ment on his counterclaim in the action.-North- ure to pay its annual licenses to the widow of
west Motor Co. v. Braund, 154 P. 1098.
a deceased employé, who had recovered judg-
ment against the company for the death, was
not void, but voidable, and could not be com-
plained of by the insurer.-Davies v. Maryland
Casualty Co., 154 P. 1116.

508 (Wash.) Where defendant corporation,
after being served through its president and
notified of the amendment of the complaint cor-
recting a misnomer of defendant, elected to
stand upon its amended answer in general de-
nial, there was a sufficient appearance to give
the court jurisdiction.-Freeborn v. Chewelah
Copper King Mining Co., 154 P. 1095.

VIII. INSOLVENCY AND RECEIVERS.
542 (Cal.) A conveyance of the property of
a corporation whereby the grantee company as-
sumed the debts of the grantor is based on a
valuable consideration, and is not fraudulent
within Civ. Code, 83442.-Manning v. App
Consol. Gold Mining Co., 154 P. 301.

Where one corporation conveyed all of its
property to a foreign corporation so that threat-
ened litigation might be conducted in the fed-
eral courts, instead of the courts of the resi-
dence of the grantor corporation, such fact does
not show that the conveyance was fraudulent.
-Id.

XII. FOREIGN CORPORATIONS.

642 (Okl.) A foreign corporation engaged in
interstate commerce within the state with a
resident thereof is not subject to Sess. Laws
1909, c. 10, art. 1, fixing the duties of foreign
corporations.-Hollister v. National Cash Reg-
ister Co., 154 P. 1157.

653 (Idaho) Under Rev. Codes, § 2792,
where plaintiff, an officer and trustee of a for-
eign corporation, was chargeable with knowl-
edge that the corporation, apparent maker of
the notes sued on, had not complied with the
state laws, and that the corporation's acts in
purchasing corporate stock from him were in
violation of law, he could not recover.-Dietrich
v. Copeland Lumber Co., 154 P. 626.

CORROBORATION.

545 (Okl.) A director of an insolvent corpo- See Homicide, 228.
ration cannot prefer an antecedent unsecured
debt due to himself, where such preference will
deprive other creditors of the entire amount due
them; the directors being trustees for the bene- See Criminal Law, 510, 511.
fit of creditors.-Union Coal Co. v. Wooley, 154
P. 62.

Where a corporation sells all its property, the
money paid is held by the directors in trust for
payment of creditors; the residue if any, to be
paid to the stockholders.-Id.

547 (Okl.) Where directors of an insolvent
corporation sold all of its property and paid
debts alleged to be due themselves, but paid
nothing to plaintiff, equity had jurisdiction of
an action to charge such directors as trustees.
-Union Coal Co. v. Wooley, 154 P. 62.

COSTS.

See Garnishment, 225.

I. NATURE, GROUNDS, AND EXTENT
OF RIGHT IN GENERAL.

2 (Idaho) Rev. Codes, § 4912, relative to
taxation of costs for the prevailing party, refers
only to costs and disbursements incurred in the
action in Idaho courts, and not to costs occa-
sioned by proceedings in the United States Land
Where directors of an insolvent corporation Office in support of an adverse claim under
have paid a debt due themselves in preference Rev. St. § 2326 (U. S. Comp. St. 1913, § 4623).
to debts due other creditors, and mingled with Golden Marguerite Silver & Copper Mining
their own funds the money received, a personal Co. v. National Copper Mining Co., 154 P. 207.
judgment may be rendered against them in fa-13 (Or.) In an equitable proceeding the al-
vor of a creditor who has received nothing.-Id. lowance of costs and disbursements rests in the
A party having a pending action for tort discretion of the court.-City of Portland v.
against a corporation is a "creditor" within American Surety Co. of New York, 154 P. 121.
Rev. Laws 1910, § 2893, defining "creditor,"
where he afterwards obtains judgment.-Id.

X. CONSOLIDATION.

590 (Okl.) Where one corporation buys all
the property of another, for full value and with-
out fraud, the purchasing corporation acquires
title free from claims of creditors of the selling
corporation.-Union Coal Co. v. Wooley, 154

22 (Cal.App.) Under Code Civ. Proc. $$
1022, 1025, to carry costs a judgment of the
superior court must amount to $300, so that
judgment for nominal damages will not do so.-
Lund v. Lachman, 154 P. 295.

47 (Cal.App.) In ejectment by the vendor
of realty against the assignee of the buyer and
others upon default in payment, where the com-
plaint stated no cause of action against a de-
fendant which had and claimed no interest in
the property, judgment for costs against such
defendant was improper.-Sweet v. Richvale
Land Co., 154 P. 608.

III. PERSONS, PROPERTY, AND
FUNDS LIABLE.

P. 62.
Where a corporation for full value and with-98 (Cal.) In stockholder's action, court's
out fraud buys all the property of another, it discretionary power as to costs, held not to au-
need not see that the purchase money is properly thorize award against intervening stockholder

COUNTY BOARDS.

COURTHOUSES.

230 (Or.) Where one several subcontrac- See Counties, 43, 51. tors joined for purpose of determining their rights to participation in suit by materialman against contractor was denied participation and obtained reversal on appeal, he was a prevailing See Counties, 124. party, and the others were not entitled to costs against him.-City of Portland v. American Surety Co. of New York, 154 P. 121.

240 (Or.) Where one of several subcontractors joined for purpose of determining their rights to participation in suit by materialman against contractor was denied participation and obtained reversal on appeal, the others were not entitled to costs against the contractor's surety. -City of Portland v. American Surety Co. of New York, 154 P. 121.

2462 (Utah) While affirmance of a judgment usually carries cost, costs will not be awarded, where appellant filed an affidavit of impecuniosity.-Cody v. Cody, 154 P. 952.

CO-TENANCY.

See Tenancy in Common.

COUNTERCLAIM.

See Set-Off and Counterclaim.

COUNTERFEITING.

See Forgery.

COUNTIES.

COURTS.

See Amicus Curiæ; Appeal and Error; Con-
stitutional Law, 56, 328; Contempt;
Counties, 124; Infants, 19; Judgment,
~~642; Jury, 11; Justices of the
Peace; Prohibition; Removal of Causes;
Trial, 370-404.

II. ESTABLISHMENT, ORGANIZA-
TION, AND PROCEDURE IN

GENERAL.

(A) Creation and Constitution, and Court

Officers.

42 (Okl.) Sess. Laws 1909, c. 14, art. 7, under which the superior court of Pottawatomie county was organized, held constitutional.Parker v. Hamilton, 154 P. 65.

(D) Rules of Decision, Adjudications, Opinions, and Records.

89 (Cal.) Decisions on the interpretation of written instruments have limited value when applied to the construction of documents embodying different language.-In re Whitney's Estate, 154 P. 855.

92 (Okl.) The expression of a view on a point not necessary to the decision is "obiter

See Affidavits, 5; Evidence, 387; Man- dictum."-Lausten v. Lausten, 154 P. 1182. damus, 77.

II. GOVERNMENT AND OFFICERS. (A) Organization and Powers of Government in General.

24 (Cal.) In absence of constitutional restrictions, Legislature has full control of property held by counties as state's agencies with power to dispose thereof without consent of or compensation to the counties.-Reclamation Dist. No. 1500 v. Superior Court in and for Sutter County, 154 P. 845.

(C) County Board.

93 (Wash.) Where a former case announced a rule affecting the rights of parties to contracts of conditional sale under which property rights have become vested, the doctrine of stare decisis requires it to be followed, except as otherwise Music House v. Ritner, 154 P. 787. determined by a subsequent statute.-Eilers

97 (Wash.) Where a case presents the same federal question already decided in another case by United States Supreme Court, its adjudication thereon is controlling.-Northern Pac. Ry. Co. v. Tuttle, 154 P. 796.

107 (Utah) In suit to quiet title to the use of water, where plaintiff claimed that he had developed the water, and defendants claimed that it was part of a natural stream, the opinof a justice of the Supreme Court concurring in the reversal of judgment for plaintiff held to have necessarily concurred also in the Lake Mining Co. v. Midway Irr. Co., 154 P. affirmative judgment for defendants.-Mountain

43 (Wash.) Under Rem. & Bal. Code, 8988, and in view of Laws 1913, p. 461, § 13, the Governor had power to appoint commission-ion ers to fill two of the vacancies caused by the recall of all three of the commissioners of a county; Const. art. 11, § 6, authorizing the county commissioners to fill vacancies, not applying.State v. Dimmick, 154 P. 163.

51 (Idaho) Under Rev. Codes, §§ 1908, 1909, held that it is the duty of the county commissioners, at their first regular meeting in January next after their election, to elect a chairman to hold until expiration of his term, unless he sooner ceases to be a commissioner.-Prichard v. McBride, 154 P. 624.

(D) Officers and Agents.

63 (Cal.App.) Under Const. art. 11, § 71⁄2, par. 5, as amended in October 1911, Pol. Code, $$ 894, 910, and 4024, held, that assistant probation officer in a county had not been regularly appointed, and hence could not collect salary as such officer.-Anderson v. Lewis, 154 P. 287.

584.

III. COURTS OF GENERAL ORIG-
INAL JURISDICTION.

(A) Grounds of Jurisdiction in General.

121 (Cal.App.) The superior court, in an action to enforce the liability of corporate stockholders for its breach of contract, had no jurisdiction as to defendants against each of whom damages for less than $300 were prayed.-Johnson v. Hinkel, 154 P. 487.

IV. COURTS OF LIMITED OR INFE

RIOR JURISDICTION.

190 (Utah) Where a judgment of the city court, not having been superseded, was satisfied

pied land to which he has no title, there is an
immediate constructive eviction, entitling the
grantee to the same remedies as though he had
been deprived of actual possession by legal pro-
cess.-Jones v. Gallagher, 154 P. 552.
COVERTURE.

200 (Okl.) Under Rev. Laws 1910, §§ 1798, See Husband and Wife.
1806, the superior court has jurisdiction of mat
ters of probate in a cause appealed from the
county court to the district court and transfer-
red on motion of plaintiffs to the superior
court.-Parker v. Hamilton, 154 P. 65.

201 (Wash.) It is within the power of the
probate court to determine all matters neces-
sary to the due administration of an estate, so
that it may authorize the administratrix to con- See Corporations, 548.
vey property held in trust for the benefit of oth-
ers.-Ritchie v. Trumbull, 154 P. 816.

VI. COURTS OF APPELLATE JURIS- See Assault and Battery;

(G) Acts and Declarations of Conspirators | weighs the evidence on the other, not necessar-
and Codefendants.

507 (Cal.) Where a boy 16 years of age ac-
companied accused and made no protest to ac-
cused committing the crime against nature, mak-662 (Wyo.) The production of witnesses in
ing no complaint until questioned by others, the the examining trial where accused was allowed
boy was an accomplice, and his testimony must
to cross-examine held sufficient confrontation to
be corroborated before conviction can be had.- warrant the introduction of their evidence on
People v. Robbins, 154 P. 317.
trial for the offense.-Ivey v. State, 154 P. 589.

of Instructions.

(G) Necessity, Requisites, and Sufficiency | ceased had retreated, without a request there-
for.-State v. Hawkins, 154 P. 827.
778 (Cal.App.) Without positive evidence 829 (Cal.App.) The refusal of requests cov-
connecting defendant with homicide charged, ex- ered by the charges given is not error.-People
cept an alleged confession and his failure to
v. Rivera, 154 P. 29.
testify for himself, an instruction that defend-829 (Idaho) Refusal of an instruction cov-
ant does not deny the killing, but justifies it in ered by one given and as favorable as the one
self-defense, throws upon him the burden of refused held not error.-State v. Jones, 154 P.
mitigation, justification, or excuse, contrary to
Pen. Code, § 1105, which imposes this burden,
Instructions given on the law of self-defense
except when the proof of the prosecution tends
as applied to the facts of the case held suffi-
to show that the crime amounts only to man- cient, so that the refusal of instructions request-
slaughter or was justifiable or excusable.-Peo-ed on that subject was not error.-Id.
ple v. Andrade, 154 P. 283.

378.

of Jury.

782 (Idaho) Rev. Codes, § 7886, does not re- | (J) Custody, Conduct, and Deliberations
quire that the court, in instructing the jury,
draw inferences from the facts in proof, or point
out what inferences might be drawn.-State v.
Jones, 154 P. 378.

865 (Okl.Cr.App.) In view of Rev. Laws
1910, §§ 5913, 5926, held that the court properly
refused to discharge the jury and directed them
to again retire, where they had announced that
they had agreed on defendant's guilt, but were
unable to agree as to the degree and punish-
ment.-Rushing v. State, 154 P. 1005.
(K) Verdict.

783 (Mont.) In a prosecution for statutory
rape, where the evidence tended to show several
acts, charges held to have instructed the jury
sufficiently on the point that evidence as to
acts other than that which the state elected to
rely on should be considered only as corroborat-
ing prosecutrix.-State v. Harris, 154 P. 198.875 (Nev.) A verdict will not be held void
783 (Wash.) In a prosecution for grand lar- for uncertainty if its meaning can be determin-
ceny, a charge mentioning that there was evi- ed by reference to the record.-Ex parte Booth,
dence introduced showing previous conviction, 154 P. 933.

but that it was no proof of defendant's guilt,884 (Mont.) A verdict of guilty fixing pun-
but only touched her credibility, was proper.-ishment at not less nor more than two years'
State v. Brownlow, 154 P. 1099.
confinement in the penitentiary, was valid as a
conviction of the offense charged, although not
in compliance with Laws 1915, c. 14, providing
for indeterminate sentences.-Ex parte Lewis,
154 P. 713.

786 (Nev.) In view of Rev. Laws, § 7160, as
amended by St. 1915, c. 157, held, that the court
properly refused to instruct that defendant had
testified in his own behalf, that this was his
legal right, and that the jury could not reject
his testimony merely because he was the ac-
cused.-State v. Blaha, 154 P. 78.

786 (Okl.Cr.App.) Giving of an instruction
singling out accused and instructing on his
credibility as a witness, held error.-Doud v.
State, 154 P. 1008.

789 (Cal.) Instruction in prosecution for
murder held erroneous for requiring defendant
to establish defense of insanity beyond a rea-
sonable doubt.-People v. Miller, 154 P. 468.
Code Civ. Proc. §§ 1826, 1835, defining cer-
tain degrees of evidence, have no application to
the question of the correctness of an instruction
which places upon the defendant the necessity
of establishing his defense by a preponderance
of the evidence, since those sections relate only
to the character of evidence sufficient to sus-
tain a verdict.-Id.

811 (Idaho) It is error to give an argumen-
tative instruction directing attention to certain
portions of the evidence and suggesting infer-
ences to be drawn therefrom, thereby singling
out certain facts favorable to defendant and
ignoring others.-State v. Jones, 154 P. 378.

814 (Kan.) In the absence of evidence that
the parties are husband and wife, the court need
not instruct that defendant cannot be convicted
of rape if the woman is his wife.-State v. Van
Sickle, 154 P. 1015.

941 (Wash.) Where the questions of men-
tality of the prosecuting witness and his credibil-
ity were fully gone into, and the showing on
such questions on a motion for new trial does
not go beyond the showing made on the trial,
it is not error to refuse a new trial.-State v.
Brooks, 154 P. 795.

957 (Cal.App.) As a conviction cannot be
set aside on the affidavit of jurors themselves,
affidavits that some of the jurors believed ac-
cused was entitled to an acquittal, and that
none understood that in convicting accused they
were convicting him of a felony, do not warrant
new trial.-People v. Sidwell, 154 P. 290.

XIV. JUDGMENT, SENTENCE, AND
FINAL COMMITMENT.

995 (Nev.) A judgment must follow and be
supported by the verdict, and, if the verdict is
not such as is determinative of the issues made
by plea of not guilty, it is a void verdict, and
the court has no jurisdiction to enter judgment
thereon.-Ex parte Booth, 154 P. 933.

XV. APPEAL AND ERROR, AND
CERTIORARI.

er Court of Grounds of Review.

(H) Requests for Instructions.
824 (Cal.App.) In a prosecution for crimi-
nal libel, where the defendant requested no spe (B) Presentation and Reservation in Low-
cific instruction as to his contention of privilege
under Pen. Code, § 256, the failure to instruct1028 (Wash.) The question of defendant's
thereon was not reversible error.-People v. connection with the offense charged cannot be
Turner, 154 P. 34.
raised on anneal, not having been presented to
or decided by the trial court.-State v. Ketter-
man, 154 P. 182.

824 (Nev.) Failure to instruct on the max-
im, "Falsus in unom, falsus in omnibus," was
not error, where accused made no request for
such instructions.-State v. Blaha, 154 P. 78.

824 (Wash.) Where an instruction as to
killing after adversary had withdrawn from con-
flict stated law generally applicable, defendant
could not complain of failure to present theory
that darkness prevented him from knowing de-

1036 (Cal.App.) Error cannot be predicat-
ed on the admission of evidence not objected to
below.-People v. Rivera, 154 P. 29.

1036 (Wyo.) Where accused made no objec-
tion to an affidavit of the prosecutor showing the
death or absence of witnesses who testified at
his examining trial, but merely objected to evi-