« ΠροηγούμενηΣυνέχεια »
RULE IN. SHELLEY'S CASE. ance and use, without notice that they were of
an inferior quality, could set off the difference
in price between the brick which was to be
delivered and that which he received.-Peterson
v. Denny-Renton Clay & Coal Co., 154 P. 123.
VII. REMEDIES OF SELLER.
334 (Cal. App.) While a seller of goods need
116-121; Crops; Evidence, cm 400, 442; contract of sale by the buyer and his refusal to
diligence in locating the nearest market and as-
| of the car of melons was $120, and that, owing
to the defendant buyer's refusal to accept same,
tbey sold for $55, held sufficient evidence of the
measure of damages to go to the jury.--Rose v.
Woldert Grocery Co., 154 P. 531.
(E) Actions for Price or Value.
ments held to sustain a verdict for plaintiff if
modified by correcting a clerical mistake in the
-Cook Co., 154 P. 1189.
(F) Actions for Damages.
to had not passed from the sellers, who there-
upon resold the bottles at private sale, their
only reinedy was to sue for damages for breach
of the contract of sale.—Lund v. Lachman, 154
383 (Cal. App.) In an action by the sellers
of wine bottles for damages for the buyer's re-
| fusal to accept, evidence held sufficient to justi-
fy a finding that the market price for bottles
prevailing on and after their arrival and rejec-
tion was at an advance over the contract price,
and insurance expense.—Lund v. Lachman, 154
sellers of wine bottles against the buyer, who
a seller is the price in the nearest market at
would have sufficed for the seller to resell.-
Lund v. Lachman, 154 P. 295.
Under Civ. Code, $ 3353, where, upon the
buyer's refusal to accept, the sellers of wine
bottles resold through their agent, an iron sales-
man, at less than the market price, on account
of his unfamiliarity with the market, the sellers.
could not recover of the buyer the difference be-
tween the selling and the contract price.-Id.
Where the sellers of wine bottles, after the
| buyer's refusal to accept, failed to sell in the
market at prevailing prices so greatly over the
contract price as to have made them whole, such
market price that would have more than made
VIII. REMEDIES OF BUYER.
ROL DISTRICTS. may exist in hisani yo. Elliott, 154
of fitness of the machinery to do the work.-1
440 (okl.). Under Rev. Laws 1910, § 2865. See Master and Servant.
as warranted.-Gutenberg See Easements.
SET-OFF AND COUNTERCLAIM.
I. NATURE AND GROUNDS OF
defendant makes against the plaintiff in a suit
to liquidate the whole or a part of his claim.-
Drovers' State Bank v. Elliott, 154 P. 255.
On 9 (Kan.) A "counterclaim" is the claim of a
| up and establishing any cross-demand which
| may exist in his favor as against plaintiff.--
Om 10 (Kan.) A "cross-demand" is a demand
which is preferred by one party to an action in
opposition to a demand already preferred
Bank v. Elliott, 154 P. 255.
See Accord and Satisfaction; Account Stated;
| Compromise and Settlement; Payment; Re-
See Deeds, ww128.
SHERIFFS AND CONSTABLES.
Tem71 (Cal. App.) Under Code Civ. Proc. $
526a, Pol, Code, g 4041, subd. 16, and Charter
of Los Angeles County (St. 1913, pp. 1487, 1490,
88 10, 21), held, that any action against sheriff
to account for fees was to be prosecuted by
county as party plaintiff, and not by a taxpayer,
Keith v. Hammel, 154 P, 871.
IV. LIABILITIES ON OFFICIAL
157 (Okl.) That a deputy sheriff becomes
angered in the discharge of his duty does not
deprive his subsequent acts of their official char-
acter.-Meek v. Tilghman, 154 P. 1190.
That a peace officer momentarily abandons
his efforts to arrest a person without a warrant
pursuant to Rev. Laws 1910, $ 5654, does not
render the resumption of this duty any the less
an official act.-Id.
an arrest without a warrant under Rev. Laws
demeanor, to prevent him from escaping, the
Om 168 (Okl.) Petition in a widow's action
against a sheriff and his bondsmen for death of
her husband, who was killed by a deputy sher-
iff, held not demurrable as failing to show that
Meek v. Tilghman, 154 P. 1190.
See Railroads, Em 307, 330, 335, 339.
no appropriation had been made therefor.-Ep-
person v. Howell, 154 P. 621.
Om 131 (Idaho) An "appropriation," within
| Const. art. 7, § 13, is authority from the Legis-
proper officers, to pay from the public moneys
a specified sum and no more, for a specified pur-
pose and no other.-Epperson v. Howell, 154 P.
imburse a former employé in the state grain
department for traveling expenses held within
the legislative power, and to leave no duty to
the auditor of state, excepting the ministerial
one of executing the legislative will.-Hicks v.
Davis, 154 P. 1030.
168/2 (Or.) Plaintiff held entitled to main-
Compensation Act, on ground that he was a
taxpayer of the state, and that the alleged un-
lawful expenditure of money appropriated by
the state thereunder would increase his financial
burden.--Evanhoff v. State Industrial Acc. Com-
mission, 154 P. 106.
V, CLAIMS AGAINST STATE.
181 (Idaho) Sess. Laws 1915, c. 27, held
| violative of Const. art. 4, § 18, as attempting to
is provide for disbursement of state funds in pay-
ment of claims without an examination of the
claims by the state board of examiners.--Epper.
son v. Howell, 154 P. 621.
STATUTE OF FRAUDS.
STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS.
The Code has abrogated the rule that where See Limitation of Actions.
For statutes relating to particular subjects, see
the various specific topics.
1. ENACTMENT, REQUISITES, AND
VALIDITY IN GENERAL.
em 15 (Or.) Const. art. 4, § 19, requiring bills
to be read by sections on three several days, in
each house, does not require the whole of a bill,
as amended during its progress through the Leg-
islature, to be so read.-Evanhoff v. State In-
dustrial Acc. Commission, 154 P. 106.
om 16 (Kan.) Laws 1913, c. 124, relative to
held not violative of Const. art. 2, § 20, pro-
viding that no law shall be enacted except by
bill, because an amendment to the bill by the
addition of an enacting clause was made by
| resolution.-Hartzler v. City of Goodland, 154
7; Constitutional 265.
Cm 351/2 (Okl.) Where the Governor's procla-
mation calling an initiative and referendum elec-
tion on a state question was filed with the secre-
tary, of state, held, that this was a sufficient
publication.-Ex parte Smith, 154 P. 521.
The purpose of Rev. Laws 1910, 88 3384, 3401,
referendum is essential, notwithstanding Rev.
Laws 1910, § 3393, and where it appears that
from failure to substantially comply with sec-
tion 3384 a number of voters sufficient to have
STATE HIGHWAY ENGINEER.
phlets containing the measure to be voted on, that every act embrace but one subject, to be
That one member of the state election board trial Acc. Commission, 154 P. 106.
he practice of medicine, prescribing the qualifica-
tions of practitioners, requiring a license to
practice, etc., held not violative of Const. art.
be clearly expressed in its title.-State v. Erick-
em 119 (Or.) Workmen's Compensation Act,
creating State Industrial Accident Commission
annual salary of $3,600 payable out of accident
fund, held not in conflict with Const. art. 9, $
ries of public officers and current expenses of
state, shall relate to no other subject.-Evan-
hoff v. State Industrial Acc. Commission, 154
15 P. 106.
em 120 (Kan.) Laws 1913, c. 124, relative to
issuance of additional city waterworks bonds,
titled an act "to regulate the business of loan-
porations other than National banks, licensed
to limit the operation of the act by ex-title.-State y. Ware, 154 P. 905.
was “An act creating a reclamation district,
* * * providing for the management and
control thereof, * * *"a provision for build-
ing levee held sufficiently expressed.--Reclama-
| for Sutter County, 154 P. 845.
Im 123 (N.M.) Drainage Act (Laws 1912, c. 84)
§ 82, now Code 1915, $ 1958. giving the right of
eminent domain, held not violative of Const. art
em 125 (Okl.) The title of Laws 1915, c. 174,
creating the state insurance board and defining
its powers, held sufficiently comprehensive to em-
(Cal.), Act May., 1911 st, 1911, P. brace the provisions of the act.-Insurance Co.
of North America v. Welch, 154 P. 48.
Tom 125 (Or.) Under Laws 1913, p. 663, pro-
and transferring its duties to the state engineer,
is void in part under Const. art. 4, 820, for
repugnancy of its provisions to its title.-Peter-
son v. Lewis, 154 P. 101.
IV. AMENDMENT, REVISION, AND
form to Const. art. 2, § 16.-Hicks v. Davis,
154 P. 1030.
en 141 (Kan.) Laws 1915, c. 14, which at-
tempts to repeal Laws 1913, c. 61, § 1, item
106, making an appropriation, held void as
V. REPEAL, SUSPENSION, EXPIRA.
TION, AND REVIVAL.
repealing act must conform to
to give force and effect to each, as the law does
a subsequent Legislature and the two amend. sonable meaning of the words used. consider
and which has long been acquiesced in, is a
m225 (Mont.) Rev. Codes, $$ 6838, 6839, ag
held to be considered as enacted at the same
time and interdependent.-Hamilton v. Hamilton,
154 P. 717.
226 (Mont.) When a statute is adopted from
| another state the language of which has been
I ton v. Hamilton, 154 P. 717.
1100 $ 324
$ 286 ..:::
UNITED STATES. 1 § 8637
... 133 $ 307
1050 $$ 769, 773, 779, 751.... 306
$ 9651 ...............
... 613 818
§ 1386, subsec. 8...
8 3300 .
8 3423, subsec. 4........
§ 3442 ..............301, 613
CODE OF CIVIL PROCE-
$ 667 .
Pars. 1553, 1554, 1558,
18 956 ............
$$ 974, 978a..
$$ 1022, 1025.....
s 1183. Amended by Laws
CONSTITUTION. $ 1194
8 1234 ...
283 $ 1619.
....845, $ 1714.
ŠS 1826, 1835............
Art. 6, Š 15...
12, $ 3..
837 | Š 1111. Amended by Laws
OLI 1911. p. 484...........
304 88 894, 910..
8 1187 ......