SUPPORT.

See Divorce, 308, 323.

SURETYSHIP.

102 (Cal.) In view of Civ. Code, § 1714, no
recovery can be had on the last clear chance See Principal and Surety.
doctrine because of the wanton negligence of
the servants of a street car company where de-
ceased's own contributory negligence was the
proximate cause of the accident.-Tucker v.
United Railroads of San Francisco, 154 P. 835.

SURFACE WATERS.

See Waters and Water Courses, 119–126.

SURGEONS.

103 (Cal.) The last clear chance doctrine
as to injuries on street car tracks applies in
California.-Tucker v. United Railroads of San See Physicians and Surgeons.
Francisco, 154 P. 835.

114 (Wash.) Evidence held to warrant find-

SURVIVAL.

SWINDLING.

ing that the motorman in charge of a street See Abatement and Revival, ~53, 57.
car could have avoided collision with the auto-
mobile truck which plaintiff was driving had
he used ordinary care when plaintiff was com-
pelled to stop his truck to avoid collision with
another vehicle.-Anderson V. Puget Sound
Traction, Light & Power Co., 154 P. 135.
STREETS.

See Highways; Municipal Corporations,
706.

SUBCONTRACTORS.

See Mechanics' Liens, 229.

SUBROGATION.

See Bankruptcy, 207; Insurance,

606.

See False Pretenses.

TAXATION.

See Appeal and Error, 154, 171; Consti-
tutional Law, 229, 284; Intoxicating
Liquors, 49; Municipal Corporations,
422-582, 958; Schools and School Districts,
100; Statutes, 64, 95; Towns,
54; Waters and Water Courses, 231.

I. NATURE AND EXTENT OF POWER
IN GENERAL.

4 (Okl.) Under Const. art. 10, § 13, the
25 (Okl.) Where the local agent of both M. Legislature may select the subjects of taxation.
and A., loan companies and mortgage creditors-In re Gross Production Tax of Wolverine Oil
of the same debtor, received a payment made by Co., 154 P. 362.
the debtor for M. and paid same on A.'s mort-5 (Or.) Where a homestead entry has been
gage which was canceled. A. having knowledge made, final proof submitted, and final certifi-
of the facts, held, that M., its mortgage having cate issued, the land immediately becomes li-
been canceled by judicial decision, was entitled able to taxation.-Cannon v. Hood River Irr.
to be subrogated in A.'s mortgage in the amount Dist., 154 P. 397.
due it and to have such mortgage restored for
that amount.-Midland Savings & Loan Co. v.
Sutton, 154 P. 1133.

II. CONSTITUTIONAL REQUIRE-
MENTS AND RESTRICTIONS.

38 (Okl.) Act March 11, 1915 (Laws 1915,
c. 107, art. 2, subd. A) § 1. imposing a gross
production tax, held not repugnant of Const.
art. 10, § 19, requiring that every tax shall
specify distinctly the purpose for which tue
tax was levied.-In re Gross Production Tax of
Wolverine Oil Co., 154 P. 362.

40 (Okl.) Act March 11, 1915 (Laws 1915,
c. 107, art. 2, subd. A) § 1, imposing a gross
production tax on ores bearing lead, zinc, etc.,
and on the production of petroleum or other
mineral oil or natural gas, held not violative
of Const. art. 10, § 5, requiring uniformity of
taxation, though it omits to impose such tax-

ation on coal.-In re Gross Production Tax off all apportionments have been made and taxes
Wolverine Oil Co., 154 P. 362.
levied. Id.

908 (Okl.) Sess. Laws 1895, c. 43, art. 3,
§ 2, amending St. 1893, § 5643, and Sess. Laws
1897, c. 32, art. 9, § 3, providing that interest,
penalties, and forfeitures on delinquent taxes
shall be paid into the county sinking fund, were
not repealed by Act March 12, 1897, amending
Sess. Laws 1895, c. 43, art. 3, § 2.-Board of
Com'rs of Custer County v. City of Clinton, 154
P. 513,

Rev. Laws 1910, §§ 6771-6775, imposing pen-
alties on delinquent taxes and providing for dis-
position thereof, held constitutional.-Id.

908 (Okl.) Laws 1895, c. 43, art. 3, § 2,
amending St. 1893, § 5643, and Laws 1897, c.
32, art. 9, § 3, providing that all interest, pen-
alties, and forfeitures on delinquent taxes shall
be paid into the county sinking fund, were not
repealed by Laws 1897, c. 32, art. 4, § 1, amend-
ing Laws 1895, c. 43, art. 3, § 2.-Hunter v.
State, 154 P. 545.

See Municipal Corporations, 422, 493;
Public Lands, 185.

TIMBER.

914 (Okl.) Under Sess. Laws 1895, c. 43,
art. 3, § 2, amending St. 1893, § 5643, and un-
der Sess. Laws 1897, c. 32, art. 9, § 3, all inter-
est, penalties, and forfeitures on delinquent tax-
es should be paid into the county sinking fund. See Logs and Logging.
-Board of Com'rs of Custer County v. City of
Clinton, 154 P. 513.

914 (Okl.) Under Laws 1895, c. 43, art. 3,
§ 2, amending St. 1893, § 5643, and under Laws
1897, c. 32, art. 9, § 3, interest, penalties, and
forfeitures on delinquent taxes should be paid
into the county sinking fund.-Hunter v. State,
154 P. 545.

TELEGRAPHS AND TELEPHONES.
See Injunction, 85; Licenses, 7.

I. ESTABLISHMENT, CONSTRUCTION,
AND MAINTENANCE.

TIME.

See Appeal and Error, 353, 564, 797, 1243;
Brokers, 50; Divorce, 170; Excep-
tions, Bill of, 41, 42; Execution, 295;
Judgment, 211; Mechanics' Liens,
132; Mortgages, 599; New Trial,
117; Sales, 334; Vendor and Purchaser,
76.

10 (Kan.) In view of Gen. St. 1909, §§ 5251,
5338, 6343, under a life insurance policy giv-
ing one month-not less than 30 days-grace in
the payment of premiums, where the last day of
grace falls on Sunday, the insured has the fol-
15 (Kan.) Where a team of horses were kill-lowing day in which to make payment.-Light-
ed by lightning while standing at the roadside ner v. Prudential Ins. Co. of America, 154 P.
under a telephone wire which sagged within 4
feet of the ground, the lightning having first
struck a pole 150 feet distant, held, that the
negligence, if any, in maintaining the wire so
close to the ground, was not the proximate
cause of the injury.-Simon v. Missouri & Kan-
sas Telephone Co., 154 P. 242.

II. REGULATION AND OPERATION.

33 (Kan.) If a noncompensatory rate may
be enforced as to a specific service by reason of
some controlling consideration of public policy,
the furnishing of a party line telephone is not
of such a peculiar character as to place it in
the exceptional list.-Emporia Telephone Co. v.
Public Utilities Commission of Kansas, 154 P.
262.

A court without power to fix a rate to be
charged by a telephone company in the future
cannot accomplish that result indirectly by en-
joining interference with a rate found to have
been unassailable in the past.-Id.

Where a court having jurisdiction determines
that a telephone rate fixed by Laws 1911, c. 238,
§ 39, and approved by the Utilities Commission
is confiscatory, the telephone company may op-
erate under such rate as it may establish until
a new one has been fixed by the Commission.
-Id.

TELEPHONES.

See Telegraphs and Telephones.

TENANCY IN COMMON.

See Husband and Wife, ~14.

II. MUTUAL RIGHTS, DUTIES, AND
LIABILITIES OF COTENANTS.

19 (Cal.) A cotenant, who may not pur-
chase and assert an outstanding title against his

227.

TITLE.

See Abstracts of Title; Adverse Possession;
Escheat; Quieting Title; Religious Societies,
18; Taxation, 796-831; Vendor and
Purchaser, 54, 214.

TORTS.

See Action, 48; Collision; Corporations,
491; Death; Fraud; Husband and Wife,
102; Libel and Slander; Municipal Cor-
porations, 7452-821; Negligence; Nuis-
ance; Principal and Agent, 147-160%;
Replevin; Trover and Conversion; Weapons,
18.

TOWNS.

See Municipal Corporations.

IV. FISCAL MANAGEMENT, PUBLIC
DEBT, SECURITIES, AND
TAXATION.

54 (Okl.) Under Rev. Laws 1910, §§ 7376,
7380, the total township levy for current ex-
penses cannot exceed 3 mills in one year and
the 10 per cent. which the excise board may
add for delinquent taxes, must not, when added
to the sum necessary for current expenses, in-
crease the levy beyond the three mill limit.-
Missouri, K. & T. Ry. Co. v. Walker, 154 P.
343.

TRADE-MARKS AND TRADE-NAMES.
III. REGISTRATION, REGULATION,
AND OFFENSES.

47 (Idaho) Where it is alleged and proven
that a policy does not truly state the contract
made or the facts on which it was based, a
court of general jurisdiction may in one action

reform the contract to make it express the in-statement unless it was supported by evidence.
tention of the parties, and enforce it as so re- -Godley v. Gowen, 154 P. 141.
formed.-Carroll v. Hartford Fire Ins. Co., 154
P. 985.

VI. TAKING CASE OR QUESTION
FROM JURY.

(A) Questions of Law or of Fact in Gen-
eral.

139 (Okl.) A verdict should be directed only
where the evidence for the adverse party, to-
therefrom, could not authorize a verdict for
gether with all inferences reasonably deducible
such party.-Case v. Posey, 154 P. 1165.

139 (Wash.) The weight of the testimony is
for the jury.-Donaldson v. Great Northern Ry.
Co., 154 P. 133.

140 (Mont.) Where a witness on cross-ex-
amination changed his testimony as to a state-
ment made to him by deceased, and testified that
he did not know whether he had mentioned such
statement in an affidavit wherein it should have
been mentioned, and there was no other evidence
as to the statement having been made, held,
that the question of the witness' credibility was
for the jury.-Alexander v. Great Northern Ry.
Co., 154 P. 914.

140 (Wash.) The credibility of witnesses is
Co., 154 P. 133.
for the jury. Donaldson v. Great Northern Ry.

143 (Kan.) Refusal to direct a verdict for
a street car passenger injured in attempting to
alight held not error, where the evidence was
conflicting as to negligence and contributory
negligence.-Christian v. Union Traction Co.,
154 P. 271.

48 (Wyo.) Although the court may do so,
it is not bound, where an offer contains admis-143 (Okl.) An issue reasonably sustained by
sible and inadmissible evidence, to separate the
evidence and receive that which is admissible.
-Reynolds v. Morton, 154 P. 325.

plaintiff's evidence is for the jury, though de-
fendant's evidence conflicts therewith.-Chicago,
R. I. & P. Ry. Co. v. Brown, 154 P. 1161.

(B) Demurrer to Evidence.

mits all facts which the evidence tends to prove
156 (Okl.) A demurrer to the evidence ad-
and all inferences reasonably deducible there-
from.-Rose v. Woldert Grocery Co., 154 P. 531.

(D) Direction of Verdict.

169 (Okl.) A verdict should be directed for
defendant only when the evidence, with all in-
ferences reasonably deducible therefrom, is in-
sufficient to support a verdict for plaintiff.--St.
Louis & S. F. Ry. Co. v. Clampitt, 154 P. 40.

VII. INSTRUCTIONS TO JURY.
(A) Province of Court and Jury in Gen-

eral.

194 (Wash.) As to defendants, charged only
of a manhole into which plaintiff fell, an in-
with negligence in the manner of maintenance
struction that there was no evidence of fault
in construction is not objectionable as a com-
ment on the facts.-Jensen v. Schlenz, 154 P.
159.

84 (Mont.) Where the only objection to the
testimony of a witness was that it was irrele-
vant, as referring to another conversation than
that testified to by another witness, who was
sought to be impeached, that objection was not
sufficient to raise the question of proper foun-200 (Okl.) The court should instruct as to
dation for the impeachment.-Doichinoff v. Chi- the law applicable to the issues of fact raised by
cago, M. & St. P. Ry. Co., 154 P. 924.
the evidence.-Missouri, O. & G. Ry. Co. v. Da-
vis, 154 P. 503.

105 (Cal.) Where the certificate of sale re-
quired by Street Opening Act to be executed
by the street superintendent is admitted in evi-
dence without objection, its insufficiency may
be reached by an attack on the findings.-Tilton
v. Decker, 154 P. 860.

V. ARGUMENTS AND CONDUCT OF
COUNSEL.

(C) Form, Requisites, and Sufficiency.

242 (Wash.) Instructions in an action for
breach of contract held not erroneous as preclud-
ing the jury from finding separately upon each
cause of action.-Auwarter v. Kroll, 154 P. 438.
(D) Applicability to Pleadings and Evi-
dence.

1082 (Wash.) There is no error where in-
formation of defendant carrying liability insur-251 (Mont.) It is not error, in an action for
ance comes to the jury only as an incident to the death of a servant, to refuse instructions on
a lawful inquiry by counsel on examining a contributory negligence, where the complaint *
juror. Jensen v. Schlenz, 154 P. 159.
was based on the theory of last clear chance;
that necessarily involving an admission of con-
tributory negligence.-Doichinoff v. Chicago, M.
& St. P. Ry. Co., 154 P. 924.

133 (Wash.) Statement of counsel in his
opening statement that defendant had discharg-
ed plaintiff and refused to pay his doctor's bill
held not prejudicial, where the court, on objec-252 (N.M.) Where in a railroad employé's
tion made, told the jury not to consider the action for injuries there was no evidence tending

252 (Okl.) A refusal to instruct that before
the plaintiff broker could recover he must have
procured a purchaser ready, willing, and able
to buy on the terms agreed upon, held not er-
ror where such instruction had no application to
the facts proven that the sale was actually
made on such terms.-First Nat. Bank of Cow-ed
eta v. Brumbaugh, 154 P. 1172.

A refusal to instruct that before the plaintiff
broker could recover he must have procured a
written enforceable contract from the purchas-
er, binding him to take the land on the terms
agreed upon, held not error where the sale had
been completed.-Id.

252 (Utah) In action for injuries to girl
eight years old, evidence held to raise question
making instruction hypothesizing fact that she
was above standard of ordinary children of her
age in understanding, knowledge, and apprecia-348 (Okl.) Under Const. art. 7, § 21, a de-
tion of circumstances applicable.-Thomas v. fendant is not entitled to have special inter-
Oregon Short Line R. Co., 154 P. 777.
rogatories submitted to the jury in addition to
the general verdict.-St. Louis & S. F. Ry. Co.
v. Clampitt, 154 P. 40.