where execution was returned unsatisfied, an order issuing execution against rents due the judgment debtor must be vacated, where there was no provision in the order as to the percentage to be taken.-Trapp v. Brown, 107 A. 413. XI. EXECUTION AGAINST THE PERSON. 448 (Vt.) In action for wrongful death from injuries received in an automobile accident, evidence showing that defendant, although unacquainted with the road and in violation of a speed statute, drove his automobile containing four passengers for hire, including deceased, at night through a fog so thick that he could not by the light of his car see more than seven feet at the rate of 35 or 40 miles per hour over a wet and slippery road, held to warrant a finding that the act was willful and malicious, and that a close jail certificate be granted under G. L. 2384.-Wellman v. Mead, 107 A. 396. 35(16) (Pa.) In a proceeding under Fiduciaries Act, § 53a, for the removal of an executor for mismanagement of the estate, wherein his answer admitted the material averments of the petition, the orphans' court properly refused to appoint an examiner to take testimony, as there was no necessity therefor.-In re Miller's Estate, 107 A. 684. IV. COLLECTION AND MANAGEMENT (A) In General. 111(1) (Md.) Where coexecutors of petitioners withheld no information, and all docu ments relating to estate were open and showed that deceased had parted with his shares of stock, but petitioners, without knowledge or an expert accountant to investigate as to the consent of coexecutors, employed counsel and stock, the court erred in approving employment and ordering expenses paid out of estate.-Sonneborn v. Hutzler, 107 A. 251. Where there is no necessity for the employ EXECUTORS AND ADMINISTRATORS. ment of counsel and the institution of proceedSee Affidavits, 15; Appeal and Error, 80, ings, counsel fees, and other expenses should 1050, 1178; Bills and Notes, 63; Car- not be allowed out of the estate.-Id. riers, 320; Contribution, 9; Courts, 118 (Pa.) An executor cannot be held liable 202, 475; Death, 10, 35, 99; Deposi- for loss by reason of depreciation in value of tions, 95; Descent and Distribution; Evi- a liquor business which he failed to sell, where it appears that he had acted in good faith and dence, 523; Gifts, 49; Insurance, 795; Master and Servant, 393; Mortgages, on advice of counsel in trying to realize the 171; Partnership, 254; Pleading, highest possible price, and that before he could 157; Principal and Surety, 43; Taxation, worthless.-In re Murnaghan's Estate, 107 A. sell federal legislation rendered the business 903; Tenancy in Common, 35; Trusts, 886, 888. 161; Wills; Witnesses, 159, 176, 182. II. APPOINTMENT, QUALIFICATION, AND TENURE. 22(2) (N.J.Prerog.) The filing of a petition for appointment of an administrator pendente lite with the orphans' court when no will has been lodged for probate with the surrogate, or when one has been lodged and no citations have been issued, and before the orphans' court has taken action in the matter of probate, is a nullity.-In re Morrissey's Will, 107 A. 70. (B) Real Property and Interests Therein. 150 (Conn.) Under the statute entitling the administratrix to the custody of the realty pending settlement of the estate, a lease executed by one cotenant and the administratrix of the other cotenant was valid for the time being, until the custody and authority of the administratrix were terminated by final settlement.Pastine v. Altman, 107 A. 803. (C) Personal Property. 32(1) (Md.) Code Pub. Civ. Laws, art. 93,154 (Del.Super.) Where a decedent at the time of her death had such a property in cer§ 14, providing that no letters of administration tain goods either by purchase or gift as enshall be granted until 20 days after death of supposed intestate, applies only to cases where titled her to their possession, her personal repthe intestacy is not notorious or has not been resentative was likewise entitled to their posproved to the satisfaction of the court, and the session to an extent to give him the right to mere fact that letters are granted within the 20 maintain replevin for their wrongful detention days does not make them invalid, so as to jus- by another.-Frick v. Miller, 107 A. 391. tify their revocation.-Chryssikos v. Demarco, 107 A. 358. V. ALLOWANCES TO SURVIVING The most-favored nation clause in the treaty between the United States and Greece does not give the consul general of Greece or his repre-193 (Pa.) Where one dies after passage of sentative the paramount right to administer estate of a citizen of Greece dying in Maryland, because of privilege conferred by convention of 1911 between the United States and Sweden, and since in the instant case none of the relatives of deceased would be entitled to have letters granted to defendant under Code Pub. Civ. Laws, art. 93, §§ 14, 16, 18-31, revoked, neither the consul general nor his representative have such right.-Id. 35(8) (Pa.) The orphans' court did not abuse its discretion under Fiduciaries Act, § 53a, in removing an executor for mismanagement of estate, where he admitted that he had failed to pay debts and taxes, and that he had misappropriated part of rentals, and made no satisfactory explanation of his actions.-In re Miller's Estate, 107 A. 684. 35(8) (Pa.) It must clearly appear that the executor is wasting or mismanaging the estate, or that for any reason its interests are likely to be jeopardized by his continuance in office to warrant his removal under Act May 1, 1861 (P. L. 680), on those grounds.-In re Kacir's Estate, 107 A. 724. Act July 11, 1917 (P. L. 755), amending Act June 7, 1917 (P. L. 429), leaving a widow and collateral kin, and by will directed distribution according to the intestate law, and conversion by widow as executrix, petition of widow, electing to take under the will, for the appointment of appraisers to set apart designated realty and personalty of the value of $5,000, will be dismissed without prejudice to her right to enforce her claim by taking credit therefor in her account as executrix and urging it upon final distribution, as the case was not one of intestacy.-In re Carrell's Estate, 107 A. 664. VI. ALLOWANCE AND PAYMENT OF CLAIMS. (A) Liabilities of Estate. 221(1) (Me.) In action for services as intestate's housekeeper, plaintiff must show that the services were rendered in pursuance of a mutual understanding that she was to receive payment or that circumstances justified the expectation that she was to be paid.-Gordon v. Keene, 107 A. 819. For cases in Dec.Dig. & Am.Dig. Key-No.Series & Indexes see same topic and KEY-NUMBER 221(2) (Pa.) Where the family relation ex-451(2) (N.J.) In action against estate of isted between a niece of decedent's wife and de- granduncle for services, held, under evidence cedent, in whose family she had lived since warranting finding that granduncle expected she was 6 years of age, there was no presump- and intended to compensate plaintiff, and that tion of decedent's liability to pay for her serv- plaintiff remained in his household and perices, whether rendered in household or busi- formed services in the expectation that she was ness affairs, and no recovery could be had, ex- to be reasonably compensated therefor, that cept on clear and satisfactory evidence of an court erred in ordering nonsuit.-Anderson v. express promise to pay.-In re Bean's Estate, Searles, 107 A. 429. 107 A. 671. XII. FOREIGN AND ANCILLARY AD- 221(5) (Me.) Verdict for services rendered intestate as housekeeper held unwarranted; the evidence showing that monthly settlements be-519(1) (N.J.Ch.) Where debt to secure tween the parties embraced all claims and that which intestate gave pledge has its situs in further compensation was not expected.-Gordon New York, where there is primary administrav. Keene, 107 A. 849. tion, and none of the things pledged are in New Jersey, and pledgee may be sued in New York, the ancillary administrator in New Jersey is not entitled to possession of the things pledged.-Wall v. American Smelting & Refining Co., 107 A. 63. 221(5) (Pa.) Decedent's loose expressions that claimant, a niece of his wife's who lived in his family, had worked faithfully for him, together with the fact that decedent's undelivered note in claimant's favor was found in his effects, would not alone justify an award for such services. In re Bean's Estate, 107 A. 671. 221(5) (R.I.) Evidence held to sustain verdict for physician suing executors for services rendered decedent.-Brooks v. Aldrich, 107 A. 100. EXEMPTIONS. See Constitutional Law, 230; Courts, 97; Homestead; Taxation, 873. EXPLOSIVES. 221(6) (Me.) Mere evidence of uncashed check from intestate to plaintiff will not support See Master and Servant, 332. a claim against the estate for money loaned. Gordon v. Keene, 107 A. 849. 221(9) (Pa.) Unless some connection is EXTORTION. shown between an undelivered note, found among See Conspiracy, 48; Criminal Law, ~815. a decedent's effects, and an alleged liability of decedent to the payee, named in the note for personal services, the note is not evidence of EXTRATERRITORIAL. such liability.-In re Bean's Estate, 107 A. 671. See Criminal Law, 97. (C) Disputed Claims. See Brokers. FACTORS. 247 (Vt.) A creditor's appeal to the county court from the commissioners' disallowance of a claim, operates to vacate the decision of 29 (Pa.) A "del credere agent" is one who, the commissioners.-Wetmore & Morse Granite Co. v. Ryle, 107 A. 109. (D) Priorities and Payment. in consideration of an additional payment, engages to become surety to his principal for not only the solvency of the debtor but for the punctual discharge of the debt, and who is virtually a guarantor of the primary debt of the purchaser.-Commonwealth v. Thorne, Neale & Co., 107 A. 814. 272 (N.J.Ch.) Where will directed payment of debts, testator's creditors were entitled to enforce debts against testator's land in preference to devisee's creditors; the will causing debts to be a charge on the land, and creating an equitable estate therein.-First Nat. Bank See Master and Servant, 95. v. Tobin, 107 A. 592. VII. DISTRIBUTION OF ESTATE. FACTORY ACTS. FALLING OR FLYING OBJECTS. 315(3) (Pa.) A bill of review was properly | See Negligence, Є~55. allowed by orphans' court to permit a widow to claim her exemption and her allowance under FEDERAL CONTROL. Act May 6, 1909 (P. L. 459), where executor, See Railroads, 52. on whom she relied, was absent from the audit on military service, and she was not represented by counsel, and her claim was not considered by auditing judge, and stock directed to be distributed had been voluntarily surrendered to an officer of court, and the rights of third parties had not intervened, and where she moved within a month for a review and promptly notified company issuing the stock not to transfer it.-In re Chappell's Estate, 107 A. 846. X. ACTIONS. 431 (2) (N.J.Ch.) A creditor of a decedent's estate who has presented his claim to the ad FEDERAL EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY See Appeal and Error, 1058; Commerce, FEDERAL OPERATION OF RAIL- ministrator has fastened his debt on the debt-See Railroads, ~51⁄2. or's property, so that he can maintain a bill against the estate and the buyer of the prop- FEDERAL SAFETY APPLIANCE ACT. erty to set aside a sale made in violation of the Bulk Sales Act.-Jaburg v. Kirschenbaum, See Evidence, 47; Master and Servant, 107 A. 60. FELLOW SERVANTS. suit was not brought against the seller's estate See Master and Servant, 185-190. before six months after the appointment of the administratrix, leave to sue the administratrix will be granted under Orphans' Court Act, § 65. -Jaburg v. Kirschenbaum, 107 A. 60. FENCES. See Adverse Possession, 13, 16. FERRIES. ormation of Instruments, 19; Vendor and 164; Witness I. DECEPTION CONSTITUTING II. REGULATION AND OPERATION. 33 (Pa.) Evidence that a passenger standing on the deck of a ferryboat was injured by being thrown to the deck when the boat collided with the slip causing a slight jar, and then a violent collision, justified the submis-18 (Del.) In an action for fraud in the sion of the defendant's negligence to the jury. -Lipman v. Delaware River Ferry Co. of New Jersey, 107 A. 219. Evidence that a passenger on a ferryboat left the ladies' cabin when boat approached the slip and moved forward on the deck, lost her balance, fell, and was injured when the boat collided with the slip, causing a slight jar and then a violent collision, justified the submission of her contributory negligence to the jury.-Id. FIRES. sale of corporate stock, the sellers having represented the company had no outstanding obligations, since the alleged misrepresentation was of a fact affecting the value of the stock, the jury could consider the subject-matter of the representations in fixing damages under the applicable Pennsylvania rule that the measure was the difference between price and value.Williams v. Beltz, 107 A. 298. 20 (Del.) The buyer of corporate stock under representations that the company had no outstanding obligations could not recover as for misrepresentations and fraud on account of the existence of a liability of the company. -Williams v. Beltz, 107 A. 298. See Arbitration and Award, 81, 85; Pay- of the purchase of any shares after knowledge ment, 35. FISH. 20 (Md.) One who did not believe statements made to him cannot recover damages or set aside a settlement upon the ground that such statements were false and fraudulent.— Wegefarth v. Wiessner, 107 A. 364. 15 (Me.) A complaint charging that defendant had in his possession lobsters which were less than 44 inches long, and that none of the lobsters were liberated alive at the risk or cost of those taking them or at the cost of defend-25 (N.H.) Deception, which does not cause ant, states a violation of Rev. St. c. 45, § 35, loss, is not a fraud, in the legal sense.-Desthough it did not state whether the lobsters were maris v. People's Gaslight Co., 107 A. 491. cooked or alive, that section, unlike previous statutes, not making the gravamen of the offense the failure to liberate such lobsters, but making it an offense for one to have them in his possession.-State v. Chadwick, 107 A.. 129. FIXTURES. See Eminent Domain, 133, 222. 7 (Me.) Blinds, doorframes, and window frames, not annexed to the real estate, not being fitted or put in place in the unplastered house, in which they were to be used, held not fixtures. -Bassett v. Breen, 107 A. 832. 28 (N.H.) Where one negligently causing the death of another, by fraudulent concealment and active misrepresentation of the facts, deceives the deceased's representative, causing him to lose the original cause of action, by reason of Pub. St. 1901, c. 191, limiting actions for damages for negligent death to two years, the representative may maintain an action in deceit and is entitled to recover the fair value of the claim as it existed when the fraud was practiced.-Desmaris v. People's Gaslight Co., 107 A. 491. II. ACTIONS. (D) Damages. 59(1) (Del.) Where a contract for the sale and purchase of stock was made and performable in Pennsylvania, the law of Pennsylvania should be applied, if there is established in that state a settled rule as to the measure of damages from fraud in the sale of stock.-Williams v. Beltz, 107 A. 298. (E) Trial, Judgment, and Review. 64(1) (Conn.) In an action by the purchaser of a retail liquor business against the seller thereof for fraudulent misrepresentations that the license for the place would be transferred, 98. whether plaintiff purchaser by his conduct evinced his intention to waive, and did waive, his right to recover of defendant seller, held for the jury.-Stacy v. Brothers, 107 A. 613. 64(1) (Del.) It was for the jury to determine whether representations by a seller of stock that the company had no indebtedness related to an 'ndebtedness existing when the rep228;resentations were made, or related to obligations or liabilities then existing, or to a liability contingent on future conditions; there being some evidence on the subject in the buyer's action for fraud.-Williams v. Beltz, 107 A. 298. See Bills and Notes, 92; Cancellation of In- In an action for fraud in the sale of corporate stock, defendants having represented the company had no outstanding obligations, the effect of the existence of a liability on the part of the company to a defendant on the value of the shares was for the jury to determine, in fixing damages under the applicable Pennsylvania rule that the difference between price and value was the measure.-Id. 64(5) (Del.) In an action for fraud and misrepresentations in the sale of corporate stock, where there was some evidence to sup For cases in Dec.Dig. & Am,Dig. Key-No.Series & Indexes see same topic and KEY-NUMBER port the allegation of deception, whether plain- | could not defeat recovery for refusal to accept tiff was in fact deceived by the representations their part of the other car, on the ground that was for the jury.-Williams v. Beltz, 107 A. the contract was within the statute of frauds. -S. Landow & Co. v. Gurian, 107 A. 517. 298. VIII. REQUISITES AND SUFFICIEN- 65(4) (Conn.) In action by the purchaser of a retail liquor business for fraudulent misrepresentations that the license held by defendant seller would be transferred, instructions as to 106(1) (R.I.) Under the Statute of Frauds, plaintiff's right to recover if he was not equal- § 6, a memorandum which sets out who are ly in the wrong with defendant in respect to the seller and the buyer of land, their respecthe sale and transfer, etc., held not erroneous, tive intention to sell or purchase, with such though failing to state that plaintiff must be description as may be applied to a particular presumed to know the law required him to have property, and terms of payment, signed by the a license, and that he was bound to know the party to be charged or his agent, is sufficient. fact.-Stacy v. Brothers, 107 A. 613. -Sholovitz v. Noorigian, 107 A. 94. VI. REAL PROPERTY AND ESTATES AND INTERESTS THEREIN. 58(1) (N.J.Sup.) The Statute of Frauds (2 Comp. St. 1910, p. 2610) § 1, relating to leases, does not apply to an oral agreement to enter into a written lease.-Cooper v. Aiello, 107 A. 473. 58(2) (N.J.Sup.) An oral agreement to make a lease for one year with an option for renewal for two years more was a contract concerning an interest in lands for which a memorandum in writing was required by 2 Comp. St. 1910, p. 2612, § 5.-Cooper v. Aiello, 107 A. 473. 60(1) (R.I.) Under Gen. Laws 1909, c. 283, § 6, and chapter 253, § 2, forbidding establishment of easement by parol testimony, or where the seller of lots exhibited to a purchaser a plan or plat, and made oral statements as to restrictions, which were embodied in the purchaser's deed, and subsequently other lots were conveyed or agreed to be conveyed free from restrictions, the successor of the purchaser of the restricted lot could not enforce against the seller its agreement to restrict the other lots by enjoining it from conveying lots free from restrictions and compelling the removal of buildings located within street lines shown on the plat.-Ham v. Massasoit Real Estate Co., 107 A. 205. VII. SALES OF GOODS. (A) Contracts Within Statute. 84 (Conn.) Where plaintiff and defendants agreed to purchase two carloads of peaches in common, and plaintiff alone had credit for the transaction, held, that the relation between the parties was that of principal and agent, and, regardless of the statute of frauds, plaintiff can recover from defendants moneys which it expended on defendants' behalf.-S. Landow & Co. v. Gurian, 107 A. 517. (B) Acceptance of Part of Goods. 90(4) (Conn.) A contract for sale and delivery of 35 barrels of sugar is taken out of the statute of frauds (Gen. St. 1918, § 6131), by the buyer accepting and receiving 5 barrels as a part thereof, allowing the buyer to recover for nondelivery of the remainder.-Morris Spirt & Co. v. Prior, 107 A. 513. 90(4) (Conn.) Where plaintiff and defendants agreed to purchase two carloads of peaches in common, and plaintiff alone had credit for such transaction, held that, after acceptance and division of one carload of peaches, there was such a part performance that defendants 106(2) (Pa.) An ordinary will advising land alleged to be pursuant to an oral agreement, but which makes no reference to the alleged agreement, and which is subject to revocation at any time before testator's decease, does not satisfy the requirements of the statute of frauds as written memoranda.-Sorber v. Masters, 107 A. 892. 106 (2) (R.I.) Under the Statute of Frauds, § 6, a memorandum reciting the receipt of $25 to bind a bargain for the sale of land, signed by the seller's agent, held sufficient though not specifically reciting an agreement on the part of the buyer to purchase.-Sholovitz v. Noorigian, 107 A. 94. 110(1) (Pa.) Even if it could be assumed that an agreement or receipt of part payment for sale of realty referred to property in South Bethlehem, Pa., and that "3 & Spruce," as used therein, meant Third and Spruce streets in that city, the statute of frauds applied, where the receipt did not specify size of property, or whether it was at corner of 3 & Spruce," and, if so, at which corner.-Weisenberger v. Huebner, 107 A. 763. ceipt of $25 to bind the bargain for the sale of 110(3) (R.I.) A memorandum reciting revendor's "brick store and land at 46 Blackstone street," without specifying dimensions of the lot or the town, held sufficient under the Statute of Frauds, § 6, for from the data given and by the aid of parol evidence the premises they were located in the town where the memcould be identified; the presumption being that orandum was made and the parties resided.Sholovitz v. Noorigian, 107 A. 94. 116(3, 4) (Pa.) Though the owner's deed was executed and delivered to his attorney, who was a dry trustee, the owner's order to make a conveyance to plaintiff had to be in writing signed by owner, or it would not bind him.Weisenberger v. Huebner, 107 A. 763. 16(5) (R.I.) Under the Statute of Frauds, § 6, a memorandum for the sale of land may be signed by a real estate broker engaged to sell the land, though he was not authorized in writing. Sholovitz v. Noorigian, 107 A. 94. 118(1) (Pa.) The facts requisite to an agreement, etc., under the statute of frauds, in case of sale of realty, may appear in two or more papers, as in a receipt or agreement to sell and in deed from owner to his attorney, if from any or either of such writings it is shown that they together were intended to be the contract of sale.-Weisenberger v. Huebner, 107 A. 763. The statute of frauds was not overcome by fact that owner's attorney and grantee, as a dry trustee, executed a deed to plaintiff, but would not deliver it because owner objected, where there was no evidence connecting deed to plaintiff with receipt for part of purchase money, and where such deed and another conveying property back to owner were found among attorney's papers after his death.-Id. IX. OPERATION AND EFFECT OF 129(3) (R.I.) The equitable rule that part performance will take an oral contract out of FERRIES. ormation of Instruments, I. DECEPTION CONSTITUTING II. REGULATION AND OPERATION. 33 (Pa.) Evidence that a passenger standing on the deck of a ferryboat was injured by being thrown to the deck when the boat collided with the slip causing a slight jar, and then a violent collision, justified the submis-18 (Del.) In an action for fraud in the sion of the defendant's negligence to the jury. -Lipman v. Delaware River Ferry Co. of New Jersey, 107 A. 219. Evidence that a passenger on a ferryboat left the ladies' cabin when boat approached the slip and moved forward on the deck, lost her balance, fell, and was injured when the boat collided with the slip, causing a slight jar and then a violent collision, justified the submission of her contributory negligence to the jury.-Id. FIRES. sale of corporate stock, the sellers having represented the company had no outstanding obligations, since the alleged misrepresentation was of a fact affecting the value of the stock, the jury could consider the subject-matter of the representations in fixing damages under the applicable Pennsylvania rule that the measure was the difference between price and value.Williams v. Beltz, 107 A. 298. 20 (Del.) The buyer of corporate stock under representations that the company had no outstanding obligations could not recover as for misrepresentations and fraud on account of the existence of a liability of the company. -Williams v. Beltz, 107 A. 298. See Arbitration and Award, 81, 85; Pay- of the purchase of any shares after knowledge ment, 35. FISH. 20 (Md.) One who did not believe statements made to him cannot recover damages or set aside a settlement upon the ground that such statements were false and fraudulent.Wegefarth v. Wiessner, 107 A. 364. loss, is not a fraud, in the legal sense.-Desmaris v. People's Gaslight Co., 107 A. 491. 15 (Me.) A complaint charging that defendant had in his possession lobsters which were less than 44 inches long, and that none of the lobsters were liberated alive at the risk or cost of those taking them or at the cost of defend-25 (N.H.) Deception, which does not cause ant, states a violation of Rev. St. c. 45, § 35, though it did not state whether the lobsters were cooked or alive, that section, unlike previous statutes, not making the gravamen of the offense the failure to liberate such lobsters, but making it an offense for one to have them in his possession.-State v. Chadwick, 107 A.. 129. FIXTURES. See Eminent Domain, 133, 222. 7 (Me.) Blinds, doorframes, and window frames, not annexed to the real estate, not being fitted or put in place in the unplastered house, in which they were to be used, held not fixtures. -Bassett v. Breen, 107 A. 832. 28 (N.H.) Where one negligently causing the death of another, by fraudulent concealment and active misrepresentation of the facts, deceives the deceased's representative, causing him to lose the original cause of action, by reason of Pub. St. 1901, c. 191, limiting actions for damages for negligent death to two years, the representative may maintain an action in deceit and is entitled to recover the fair value of the claim as it existed when the fraud was practiced.-Desmaris v. People's Gaslight Co., 107 A. 491. II. ACTIONS. (D) Damages. 59(1) (Del.) Where a contract for the sale and purchase of stock was made and performable in Pennsylvania, the law of Pennsylvania should be applied, if there is established in that state a settled rule as to the measure of damages from fraud in the sale of stock.-Williams v. Beltz, 107 A. 298. (E) Trial, Judgment, and Review. 64(1) (Conn.) In an action by the purchaser of a retail liquor business against the seller thereof for fraudulent misrepresentations that the license for the place would be transferred, 98. whether plaintiff purchaser by his conduct evinced his intention to waive, and did waive, his right to recover of defendant seller, held for the jury. Stacy v. Brothers, 107 A. 613. 64(1) (Del.) It was for the jury to determine whether representations by a seller of stock that the company had no indebtedness related to an 'ndebtedness existing when the rep228;resentations were made, or related to obligations or liabilities then existing, or to a liability contingent on future conditions; there being some evidence on the subject in the buyer's action for fraud.-Williams v. Beltz, 107 A. 298. In an action for fraud in the sale of corporate stock, defendants having represented the company had no outstanding obligations, the effect of the existence of a liability on the part of the company to a defendant on the value of the shares was for the jury to determine, in fixing damages under the applicable Pennsylvania rule that the difference between price and value was the measure.-Id. See Bills and Notes, 92; Cancellation of Instruments, 4; Chattel Mortgages, ~~~~63; Conspiracy, 44, 45, 48: Corporations, 80, 563; Criminal Law. 150; Deeds, 70, 211; Evidence, 397, 441; Fraud, 28; Frauds, Statute of: Fraudulent Conveyances; Husband and Wife, 492; Injunction, 26, 223; Insurance, 278, 695; Intoxicating Liquors, 103; Judgment, 443, 464; Limitation of Actions, 100, 104, 199; Master and Servant, 95; Mortgages, 64(5) (Del.) In an action for fraud and 78, 239; Partnership, 258; Pleading, misrepresentations in the sale of corporate 8; Principal and Surety, 156; Ref-1 stock, where there was some evidence to sup |