Workmen's Compensation Act (continued).

other business, is an independent contractor and not an employee under
the provisions of the workmen's compensation act and, if injured while
engaged in the performance of the contract, is not entitled to the benefit
of the provisions of the act. Robichaud's Case, 60.

WRIT OF ERROR.

A decree in a suit in equity which was held did not make res judicata, in a
writ of error to set aside a judgment in an action of tort on the ground
that the court never had jurisdiction over two of the defendants, the ques-
tion whether the court in the original action of tort ever had jurisdiction
over the two defendants. Hanzes v. Flavio, 320.

The proceedings upon a writ of error are according to the common law except
as modified by usage. Ibid.

Upon a report by a single justice of this court of his findings of fact and rulings
of law upon a writ of error, there can be no review of questions of fact. Ibid.
Upon a writ of error assigning that a judgment in tort should be reversed
because the court never had jurisdiction over two of four defendants named
therein, a determinative question being, whether the four defendants were
partners at the time of the bringing of the action, a finding of a single justice,
who heard the case upon the pleadings and auditor's report and reported the
case to this court, adopting the finding of an auditor upon conflicting evi-
dence warranting a finding either way that, previous to the bringing of the
original action, the two plaintiffs in error over whom, it was contended, the
court did not acquire jurisdiction, had retired from the partnership, was a
determination of a question of fact, which, upon the record, could not be
reviewed. Ibid.

A domestic judgment cannot be attacked collaterally and is reversible only on
a writ of error. Heard v. Calkins, 526.

WRONGDOER WITHOUT REMEDY.

In a suit to restrain an infringement of a trade name and label and for damages,
where the master found that the defendant purchased of a third party a
substance under the same name as the plaintiff's and resold it, and that
the profit to the defendant was the difference between the sum paid to the
third party and the selling price, and this sum was awarded as damages to
the plaintiff, it was held that the contention of the defendant that he should
be allowed to deduct a share of his operating expenses could not be sus-
tained. Grocers Supply Co. v. I. Renaud Co. 180.

Evidence upon which it was held that a wife, from whom her husband had
obtained, in another State, a divorce which was of no effect in this Common-
wealth, could not maintain in this Commonwealth, upon her husband re-
marrying, a libel for divorce on the ground of adultery, because she has
connived in the commission of the offence of which she complains. Lange-
wald v. Langewald, 269.

In a suit in equity to compel a reconveyance of premises to the plaintiffs by
one who had acquired title through a sale in foreclosure of a mortgage,
where it appeared that previous to the foreclosure sale the plaintiffs had
conveyed the premises to a third person who had conveyed them to a

Wrongdoer Without Remedy (continued).
fourth person and the plaintiffs contended that they still owned the bene-
ficial interest in the property and it appeared that the conveyances to the
successive grantees were made in order to hinder, defeat or defraud the
creditors of one of the plaintiffs, it was held that the plaintiffs could have
no relief in equity. Dunne v. Cunningham, 332.

In a suit in equity to restrain a violation of an equitable restriction, certain
violations of the restriction by the plaintiff were held under the circum-
stances not to preclude relief. Goulding v. Phinney, 411.