Εικόνες σελίδας
PDF
Ηλεκτρ. έκδοση

p. 419), of provision to section 20 of the cus- DELEGATION OF POWER.
toms administrative act of June 10, 1890, c.
407, 26 Stat. 140.- United States v. G. Falk & See “Constitutional Law," 8 2.
Bro., 191.

Duty on leaf tobacco, which on withdrawal from bonded warehouse, has lost weight must

DEMURRER. be assessed on the weight at the time of the In pleading, see “Equity,” $ 2. original entry under Act July 24, 1897, c. 11, § 33, 30 Stat. 213 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1701.]- United States v. G. Falk & Bro., 191. DESCENT AND DISTRIBUTION.

Congress, by enacting proviso to Act July 24, 1897, c. 11, $ 33, 30 Stat. 213 [U. S. Comp. See "Wills.” St. 1901, p. 1701), which differs from proviso Inheritance tax law denying due process of law, to Act Oct. 1, 1890, c. 1244, 850, 26 Stat. see "Constitutional Law," $ 9. 624, only in substituting the word "entry" for Inheritance tax law denying equal protection the word "withdrawal" as the date from which of law, see “Constitutional Law," § 6. the weight of merchandise withdrawn from bond- Inheritance tax law impairing, obligation of ed warehouse is to be taken as the basis of contract, see "Cunstitutional Law,' $ 4. entry, held to have adopted the construction followed by executive officers charged with the administration of the law that such proviso

DEVISES.
was not limited to merchandise imported before See “Wills."
the act took effect.—United States v. G. Falk
& Bro., 191.

DISCHARGE.
DAMAGES.

From indebtedness, see "Bankruptcy," § 6;

"Release." Objections for purpose of review as to rulings on issues relating to see “Appeal and

DISEASES. Error," $ 3. Parol or extrinsic evidence to determine issue of alien as affecting right to come into coun

as to liquidated damages or penalty, see “Evi- try, see "Aliens," $ 1.

dence," $ 2. Pleading damages as set-off, see "Pleading," § 1.

DISMISSAL AND NONSUIT. § 1. Liquidated damages and penalties. Dismissal of appeal to supreme court, see

Clause in contract with government for con- "Courts," § 14. struction of gun carriages executed when war Dismissal of writ of error in supreme court, was imminent, providing for the deduction of see "Courts," & 13. $3.5 from the purchase price for each day's delay, held liquidated damages, and not a penalty.-United States v. Bethlehem Steel Co.,

DISTRIBUTION. 450.

Of estate of bankrupt, see "Bankruptcy," 5. DEATH. Appellate jurisdiction of Supreme Court in ac

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. tion for death of employé of interstate carrier, see "Courts," $ 14.

Appeals from courts of to supreme court, seeEffect of death of trustee, see “Trusts," § 1.

"Courts," 8 12. Liability of master for death of servant, see “Master and Servant," $ 2.

DIVERSE CITIZENSHIP. Of principal as affecting right of broker to commissions, see "Brokers," 8 1.

As ground of appellate jurisdiction of circuit

court of appeals, see "Courts," § 16. DEBTOR AND CREDITOR. Ground of jurisdiction of United States courts,

see "Courts," § 5; "Removal of Causes," 88

1, 2. See "Bankruptcy."

DIVORCE.
DEEDS.

Effect on community property rights, see "Hus

band and Wife," $ 1. Of trust, see “Mortgages." § 1. Requisites and validity.

DOMICILE. *Instrument construed and held not a deed, but simply a power of attorney subject to rev. Residence as ground of jurisdiction, ser ocation. --Taylor V. Burns, 40.

"Courts," $ 5. § 2. Construction and operation.

A mere technical school excluding all religious instruction held not to satisfy the condition on DUE PROCESS OF LAW. which a Protestant mission was transferred by the American board of commissioners for for. See "Constitutional Law," 88 7–10. eign missions to the Hawaiian government.- Jurisdiction of supreme court in actions inLowrey v. Territory of Hawaii, 622.

volving question of, see "Courts," $ 14. *Point annotated. See syllabus.

DUTIES.

time for its completion.--Stone V. Southern

Illinois & Missouri Bridge Co. 615.
Customs duties, see "Customs Duties."

§ 2. Proceedings to take property and

assess compensation,
EIGHT-HOUR LAW.

Appropriation by eminent domain of land for

terminal facilities for a bridge erected under
See “Master and Servant," $ 1.

Act Jan. 26, 1901, c. 181, 31 Stat, 741, over
Intent as element of crime in violation of, see navigable stream, 'held not forbidden' by that

,
"Criminal Law," $ 1.

Bridge Co., 615.

EJECTMENT.

EMPLOYÉS.
See "Lis Pendens."

See “Master and Servant."
Bar of action by former adjudication, see
"Judgment," $ 5.

ENROLLMENT.
ELECTION OF REMEDIES. Of Indians, see "Indians."
*Prosecution of an action at law on an in-
surance policy to final judgment, denying re-

ENTRY.
covery on the ground that the policy could not
be recovered on as it stood, held not an election Of imported goods, see "Customs Duties,” $ 3.
barring suit to reform the policy.-Northern
Assur. Co. v. Grand View Bldg. Ass'n, 27.

EQUALIZATION.
*Seller in contract of conditional sale held
not by attempting to enforce materialmen's liens Of taxes, see "Taxation," 8 5.
to make an election preventing him from suing
in replevin.-William W. Bierce v. Hutchins,
524.

EQUITABLE LIENS.
EMBEZZLEMENT.

See "Liens."
Decisions reviewable in prosecution for, see

EQUITY.
"Criminal Law," $ 8.
Punishment for in violation of due process of Equitable liens, see "Liens.”
law, see "Constitutional Law," 887–10.

Equitable relief against collection of tax, see

"Taxation," $ 6.

Laches in suit by state, see "States," $ 2.
EMINENT DOMAIN.

Particular subjects of equitable jurisdiction and
Condemnation of shares of stock owned by

equitable remedies.
minority stockholders as denial of due pro-

See "Injunction"; "Receivers"; "Trusts."
cess of law, see "Constitutional Law," $ 7. Relief against judgment, see "Judgment," $ 3.
Dismissal of writ of error in supreme court in Suits for infringement of patents, see “Pat-

action involving validity of laws relating to ents," $ 3.
condemnation of shares of stock, see "Courts,"
$ 13.

§ 1. Parties and process.
Laws relating to condemnation of stock of rail-

Objection that widow of testator's son should
road companies owned by minority stock have been made a party to a bill to review a de-
holders as impairing: obligation of contract, cree declaring a testamentary trust, to violate
see “Constitutional Law," § 4.

the rule against perpetuities, held too late when
Public improvements by municipalities, see

raised on demurrer to bill of review.-Landram
"Municipal Corporations," $ 2.

v. Jordan, 17.
Removal of condemnation proceedings to feder- & 2. Pleading.

al court, see "Removal of Causes," $ 2.
Right of corporation to exercise power of as leased from liability on public bonds of the

The question whether Virginia has been re-
federal question giving jurisdiction to Su- state outstanding January 1, 1861, will not be
preme Court, see "Courts," 8 14.

passed upon on demurrer to bill filed by that
§ 1. Nature, extent, and delegation of state against West Virginia to adjudicate
power.

amount due the former by the latter as its pro-
The making of alterations in a bridge erected portion of the public debt of the original state
over an interstate water way which the Secre-

of Virginia. Commonwealth of Virginia V.
tary of War, under Act March 3, 1899, c. 425, State of West Virgina, 732.
§ 18, 30 Stat. 1121, 1153 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, Consideration of objections of multifarious-
p. 3545], requires to secure navigation against ness, misjoinder of parties and causes of action,
an unreasonable obstruction, is not a taking of may be postponed until final hearing on bill by
private property for public use.-Union Bridge Virginia against state of West Virginia to ad-
Co. v. United States, 367.

judicate amount due the former as proportion
Owner of property taken for approaches and of the public debt assumed by West Virginia.
terminal facilities for a bridge under Act Jan. -Commonwealth of Virginia v. State of West
26, 1901, c. 181, 31 Stat. 741, over a navigable Virginia, 732.
stream, held denied no federal right where
bridge was constructed without complaint by

ERROR, WRIT OF.
federal authorities; Congress having, by Act
Jan. 18, 1904, c. 5, 33 Stat. 6, extended the I See "Appeal and Error."

*Point annotated. See syllabus.

[ocr errors]

ESTABLISHMENT.

§ 1. Nature, form, and contents in gen-

eral.
Of canals, see Canals," $ 1.

General statements in bill of exceptions in ac-
Of railroads, see "Street Railroads," $ 1. tion on a bond held to furnish no basis for

assertion that there was no evidence of the
ESTATES.

amount of damages sustained from each of

the breaches of contract.-Mercantile Trust Co.
Created by will, see "Wills," $ 1.

v. Hensey, 535.
Estates for years, see "Landlord and Tenant."
Restrictions on creation of future estates, see

EXCHANGES.
"Perpetuities.”

Concurrent and conflicting jurisdiction of courts
ESTOPPEL.

relating to restraining use of quotations, see

"Courts," $ 18.
By judgment, see "Judgment,” $8 5, 6. Jurisdiction of federal court in action to re-

strain use of quotations as dependent on
EVIDENCE.

amount in controversy, see “Courts," $ 6.
Applicability of instructions to evidence, see
*Trial," § 1.

EXECUTION.
Presumption as to compliance with condition

precedent to issuance of county railroad aid See "Judicial Sales.”
bonds, see "Counties," $ 1,
In actions by or against particular classes of

EXECUTORS AND ADMINISTRATORS.
persons.

See “Wills."
See "Master and Servant," $ 2.
Trustee in bankruptcy, see "Bankruptcy," § 4. Laws relating to transfer taxes as denying due

4

process of law, see "Constitutional Law," $ 9.
In particular civil actions or proceedings. Laws relating to transfer taxes as impairing
For death of servant, see "Master and Serv-

obligation of contract, see “Constitutional

Law," $ 4.
ant," $ 2.
On foreign judgment, see "Judgment,” $ 8.

Right of broker to recover commissions against

personal representatives of principal, see
In criminal prosecutions.

Brokers," § 1.
See "Criminal Law," $ 6.

Testamentary trustees, see "Trusts."
Review and procedure thereon in appellate
courts.

EXEMPTIONS.
Harmless error in rulings on, see "Appeal and From taxation, see "Taxation,” $ 3.
Error," $ 6.

Of street railroad from duty to pave street,
8 1. Judicial notice.

see “Street Railroads,” $ 2.
Courts will take judicial notice of the fact
that in the West cattle are required to be

EXPERT TESTIMONY.
branded to identify their ownership.-Territory
of New Mexico v. Denver & R. G. R. Co., 1. In civil actions, see "Evidence," $ 3.
& 2. Parol or extrinsic evidence affect-
ing writings.

EXPRESS COMPANIES.
Recourse may be had to prior negotiations,
where it is doubtful whether penalty or liqui. See "Commerce," $ 2.
dated damages are intended by a clause in a Violation of liquor laws, see “Intoxicating Liq-
written contract.-United States v. Bethlehem

uors," $ 1.
Steel Co., 450.
*Extrinsic evidence of circumstances preced-

EXTENSION.
ing agreement and long-continued practice un-
der it held admissible as an aid to the interpre- of life of street railroad franchise, see "Street
tation of the conditions of such agreement.-- Railroads," § 1.
Lowrey v. Territory of Hawaii, 622.
§ 3. Opinion evidence.

EXTRADITION.
*Allowing a practical railroad man to testify
as to whether a buffer at the end of a spur/ $ 1.. International.
track was a reasonably safe one, and whether

Omission of the words “or be punished" from
the proper care had been exercised in building the provision of article 3 of the extradition
an overhead structure, held not an abuse of dis- treaty with Great Britain of July 12, 1889 (26.
cretion.-Gila Valley, G. & N. Ry. Co. v. Lyon, Stat. 1508), does not justify, imprisonment on
145.

former conviction for any offense of a person

extradited from Canada for an offense against
*A statement that the principal chief of the the United States until he has had opportunity
Choctaw Nation ratified an illegal sheriff's to return from Canada in view of positive pro-
sale held a conclusion of law, and inadmissible visions of Rev. St. U. S. 88 5272, 5275 [U. S.
in evidence.-Walker v. McLoud, 293.

Comp. St. 1901, pp. 3595, 3596), and the earlier

Ashburton treaty of 1842 (8 Stat. 572–576).-
EXCEPTIONS, BILL OF.

Johnson y. Browne, 539.

§ 2. Interstate.
Questions presented by for review, see "Appeal Independent proof, apart from requisition
and Error," $ 4.

papers, that the accused was a fugitive from
*Point annotated. See syllabus.

justice, need not be demanded by the Governor.

FORECLOSURE.
-Pettibone v. Nichols, 111.

Arranging for the arrest and deportation of Of mortgage, see “Mortgages,” g 1.
accused, so as to leave him no opportunity to
prove to the Governor of the surrendering state
that he was not a fugitive from justice, held not

FOREIGN CORPORATIONS.
to violate Const. U: S. art. 4, 82, or Rev. St. See “Corporations,” $ 2.
U. S. 5278 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901. 3397],
relating to extradition.-Pettibone v. Nichols, Action by state to restrain acts of outside of
111.

state but causing injury in state, see “States,"

§ 2.
Fugitive from justice within Const. U. S. Adoption by federal court of practice of state
art2, . [

court relative to appearance by, see “Courts,
Comp. St. 1901, p. 3597], defined. Appleyard v.

8 7.
Commonwealth of Massachusetts, 122.

Conspiracy between to monopolize trade, see
The belief of the accused, when leaving the

"Monopolies," $ 1.
demanding state, that he had not committed any Denial to of equal protection of laws, see “Con-
crime, does not prevent his being a fugitive stitutional Law," § 6.
from justice within Const. U. S. art. 4, § 2, and Denial to of privileges and immunities, see
Rev. Št. U. S. $ 5278 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. "Constitutional Law," $ 5.
3597].- Appleyard v. Commonwealth of Massa- Receivers of in general, see "Receivers,” s 1.
chusetts, 122.

Regulations of impairing obligation of con-

tract, see "Constitutional Law," § 4.
FACTORS.
See "Brokers."

FOREIGN JUDGMENTS.

See “Judgment,” $$ 7, 8.
FEDERAL COURTS.
See "Courts," $$ 3-17.

FOREIGN RECEIVERSHIP.

See "Receivers," $ 1.
FEDERAL QUESTIONS.
Grounds for jurisdiction, see “Courts," § 4.

FORFEITURES.

Judicial sale in proceedings to enforce, see "Ju-
FEES.

dicial Sales."

Of lease, see "Landlord and Tenant," $ 1.
Of clerks of courts, see "Clerks of Courts."

Of rights in community property, see "Hus-
Of United States commissioners, see "United

band and Wife," $ 1.
States Commissioners."

FORMER ADJUDICATION.
FILING.

See "Judgment," 88 5, 6.
Claims against bankrupt estate, see "Bank-
ruptcy,” $ 5.

FORMER JEOPARDY.
FINAL JUDGMENT.

Bar to prosecution, see “Criminal Law," $ 4.
Appealability, see "Appeal and Error," $ 2.

FRANCHISES.
FINDINGS.

Of street railroads, see "Street Railroads," $ 1.
By interstate commerce commission, see "Com-

FRAUD.
merce," $ 4.

As ground for equitable relief against judg.
FIRES.

ment, see "Judgment," $ 3.

By landlord or tenant, see "Landlord and Ten.
Liability of carrier for injuries to goods by ant,” $ 1.
fire, see “Carriers," § 2.

By principal or agent, see “Principal and

Agent," $ 2.
FLAGS.

In claims to public lands, see "Public Lands,"

& 2.
Laws relating to use of for advertising pur- Right to discharge in bankruptcy as against
poses as denial of equal protection of law,

claim founded on fraud, see "Bankruptcy,'
see "Constitutional Law," $ 6.

§ 6.
Laws relative to use of for advertising pur-

FREIGHT.
poses as denying due process of law, see
"Constitutional Law," $$ 7-10.
Laws relating to use of for advertising pur-

See “Carriers," § 1.
poses as denying privileges and immunities
of citizens, see “Constitutional Law," § 5. FUGITIVE FROM JUSTICE.
Power of state to punish use of for advertis-
ing purposes, see "Criminal Law," g 1. See “Extradition," § 2.

*Point annotated. See syllabus.

GAMING.

$ 2. Jurisdiction, proceedings, and re-

lief.
Appellate jurisdiction of supreme court in pros-

One imprisoned under conviction

in

an
ecution for violation of gaming law, see Oklahoma court held not entitled to release
"Courts," 8 14.

on habeas corpus under Rev. St. U. S. § 753
Enactment and validity of statutes in general, [U. $. Comp. St. 1901, p. 592], because the
see "Statutes," $ 1.

grand jurors were summoned from the body
Laws relating to as denying equal protection of the county and were not all electors or
of law, see "Constitutional Law," $ 6.

residents of the territory.-In re Moran, 25.
Laws relating to as denying due process of law,
see “Constitutional Law," § 7.

HARMLESS ERROR.
GRAND JURY.

In civil actions, see "Appeal and Error," $ 6.
In criminal prosecutions, see “Criminal Law,”

§ 8.
Disobedience of law relating to as ground for
habeas corpus proceedings in Supreme Court,

HOMESTEAD.
see "Habeas Corpus," § 1.

Entries on public lands, see "Public Lands,"
GRANTS.

$ 1.

HOMICIDE.
Of public lands, see "Public Lands."

Former jeopardy, see “Criminal Law," § 4.

Jurisdiction of prosecution for, see "Criminal
GUARANTY.

Law," $ 2.

Participation in murder of person under sen-
Plea in action on, see "Pleading," 1.

tence of death during delay attendant on ap-

peal as contempt of court, see "Contempt,
§ 1. Construction and operation.

$81, 2.
Sales of merchandise held covered by a bond Trial for by court martial, see "Army and
conditioned that purchasers will pay the mon- Navy."
ey due and to become due.--McGuire v. Gerst-
ley, 332; Clark v. Same, 337.

§ 1. Trial.

*Refusal of trial court to instruct jury to

bring in verdict of not guilty, in a homicide
HABEAS CORPUS.

case on the theory that corpus delicti had not

been proved, held not error.- Perovich v. United
Contempt of court in habeas corpus proceedings, States, 456.

see "Contempt," $81, 2.
Form of remedy on review, see "Appeal and

HUSBAND AND WIFE.
Error," $ 1.
Review of habeas corpus proceedings by Unit- See “Marriage.”

ed States Supreme Court, see “Courts," $ 12. Appellate jurisdiction of supreme court in suit
Review of moot questions in habeas corpus instituted in district court for liquidation of

proceedings, see 'Appeal and Error,” g 7. community, see "Courts," $ 12.
8 1. Nature and grounds of remedy. § 1. Community property.

Failure to specify a building in the order of A rule of limited forfeiture in lieu of the
the Supreme Court of Oklahoma fixing Lawton rule of the Spanish law that the wife against
as a place where the district court should be whom a divorce for adultery, was decreed for-
held did not justify relief by habeas corpus feited all right to her share in community was
of a person convicted of crime therein.-In re adopted for Porto Rico by Civ. Code 1899, art.
Moran, 25

73, par. 3, Civ. Code 1902, tit. 5, c. 5, § 174.-

Garrozi v. Dastas, 224.
Disobeying law, governing selecting of grand
jurors, does not affect jurisdiction of court

The rule of the Spanish law that a wife
so as to justify release on habeas corpus of against whom judgment of divorce for adultery
one convicted on indictment found by such jury. has been decreed forfeits all right to her share
-In re Moran, 25.

in the community property does not obtain in

Porto Rico because of Civ. Code 1889, art. 1417;
Compelling accused to stand up and walk Civ. Code 1902, § 1330.-Garrozi v. Dastas, 224.
before the jury even if contrary to Const.
U. S. Amend. 5, does not affect the jurisdiction

Counsel fees cannot be allowed by District
as to justify relief by habeas Court of the United States in Porto Rico to a
corpus.-In re Moran, 25.

wife in a suit for liquidation of community.-

Garrozi v. Dastas, 224.
A person held in custody by a state for trial
in one of its courts under an indictment for a

The amount of alimony pendente lite and
crime against its laws will not be released on expenses incurred by wife in a divorce sanction-
habeas corpus by a federal court because meth-ed by Porto Rico court are properly allowed the
ods to secure his presence may have violated wife in suit for liquidation of community.--
Const. U. S. art. 4, § 2, or Rev. St. U. S. $ 5278 Garrozi v. Dastas, 224.
[U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 3597], relating to The objection that the District Court of the
extradition. - Pettibone v. Nichols, 111.

United States for Porto Rico should not have
Relief by habeas corpus by a federal court given a money decree in a suit by a wife to

obtain the liquidation of the community held
commitment entered after a jury had returned not valid.-Garrozi v. Dastas, 224.
a verdict of not guilty by reason of insanity A divorced wife is entitled to liquidation of
will not lie.-Urquhart v. Brown, 459.

the community and payment of her share under
* Point annotated. See syllabus.

« ΠροηγούμενηΣυνέχεια »