« ΠροηγούμενηΣυνέχεια »
LIMITATION OF ACTIONS-Con-
been constructec. Texas W.
account of fraud. Action to re- Prosecution for penalty barred by
fuse to discover matters expos-
(N. H.), 359.
contract held sufficient to bind Filing map and profile held not a
C. 0. Co. (W. l'a.), 27.
pany title. Williamsport & X.
R. Co. (Pa.), 224.
to condemn land outside of such
company to restain another
company from locauing its road
over same land. Williamsport
& E. R. Co. (Pa.), 224.
not entitled to alleged, in an. constitute legal location giving
R. Co. (Pa.), 224.
Title by location as against land-
is only conditional. Williams.
port & N. B. R. Co v. Phila-
for taking land held not an ac- Title by location as against third
persons and rival corporation is
Probable cause. Chicago, B. &
Paul C. R. Co. (Minn.), 290.
equitable proceedings. Amount
tola (Fla.), 293 n.
claim in full from, cannot com-
erection of shanties not within
Co. (Neb.), 686.
for the construction of railroads,
Condemnation of market prop-
See EMINENT DOMAIN,
Election of directors. Right of
stockholders to cumulate their
R. Co. (W. Va.), 381.
compel company to deposit
of award, 262 n.
of, working on bridge held not
torts of servants. See PASSEN.
GERS, Torts of servants.
liable for wilful torts of servants
R. Co. (La.), 615.
Acquisition. Lien need not be ac-
quired on every part of road.
to have been an interlocutory
ing to and for whom labor and
ject to lien. Court will permit
S. F. R. Co. (Cal.), 293.
cient where it is stated to be a
Mortgage; priority of mechanic's
lien over, 286 n.
junior to mechanic's lien, un.
Co. (Ind.), 271.
ial was furnished or work done;
uals owning it as a co-partner.
Brown v. Buck (Ark.), 295 n.
or any other struc-
under Ga. statute.
mechanic's lien attaches to,
Sale of road. Railroad must be
sold as entirety to enforce lien.
MECHANIC'S LIEN- Continued. MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS-
to fund derived from sale. STREET RAILWAYS.
to lien held not unconstitution- jury; but where facts are undis.
court. Dewald v. Kansas City,
on, not maintainable under stat. Findings on the facts. Review of
ial man delivering ties is not, NUISANCE.
out part of answer where there
materials were delivered out- R. Co. v. Kimberly (Ga.), 307.
Director. Contract with company
Allemong v. Simmons (Ind.),
owning majority of stock,
cannot contract for construction
of. Lien on specified part of company held subject to law
late their votes. Right of stock-
holders enforced by mandamus.
mineral lands; opinion evidence R. Co. (W. Va.), 381.
Absence of president from state.
across mining lands. Damages. Harper v. Newport News & N.
See EMINENT DOMAIN, Damages. V. R. Co. (Ky.), 373 n.
Service of process. See that title.
PARENT AND CHILD.
ages for injury to child. Con.
tributory negligence of parents
for city street. See STREETS dangerous position. Aveyr'.
Galveston, H. & S. A. R. Co.
PASSENGERS. See Baggage; SLEEP- PASSENGERS.
ING CARS ; TICKETS AND FARES. Duty to Carry-Continued.
fact that there was
car and engine and meeting with company, if it could have pro-
Davis v. Chicago, Purcell v. Richmond & D. R.
Failure to stop at station for pas-
ger. Effect of stipulation lim- Company liable for punitive
to take on passengers.
tion for tort. Sufficiency of
inond & D. R. Co. (N. Car.),
or to carry him without charge, Passenger left owing to failure of
McVeety station. Special regulations.
(Miss.), 461 n.
Collision ; case of prima facii neg.
passenger is injured.
or's invitation to ride on freight senger may recover. McGoffin
Instruction of court as to pre-
sumption of negligence from
clerk in posi al car, is a passen- neous as being on the weight of
senger was injured by, entitles
E. R. Co. V. Mallette (Ala.),
in case of, prima facie case of
Southern Kan. R. Co. 7'. Walsh
Presumption of negligence
thrown down by concussion of
cars. Presumption of negli-
P. R. Co. 7. Love, 492 n. :
injured owing to, presumption
other places than place of ac-
by showing inevitable accident R. Co. (N. Car.), 513 n.
missible under the complaint.
Richmond & D. R. Co. 7. Vance
water during rain. Conflicting Exemplary damages for injuries
to passenger caused by defect-
for injury caused by derail.
to passengers more than ordi. where there is entire want of
care. Alabama G. S. R. Co. v.
may be recovered, where in-
Southern jury was caused by rotten ties
negligence. Alabama G, S. R.
Co. v. Hill (Ala.), 501.
not recoverable for injury
likely. Richmond & D. R. Co.
Landslide, Company must
whether there was subsequent that they will not slide from or-
caused by ordinary rain, not
“act of God" exempting
company from liability. Glee-
V. Virginia M. R. Co.
Robinson (Tex.), 521 9.
break of. Expert testimony
ning into cars on another track.
track, not negligence. Grant 7.