Εικόνες σελίδας
PDF
Ηλεκτρ. έκδοση

possession by the mortgagees.-In re Shaw (D. COLLATERAL INHERITANCE TAXES. C.) 273.

See "Internal Revenue."
CHECKS.

COLLECTION.
See "Bills and Notes."

Of estate of decedent, see "Executors and AdCHILDREN.

ministrators," $ 2. See "Guardian and Ward."

COLLISION.

8 1. Narrow channels, harbors, rivers, CHINESE.

and canals.

*Tugs held not chargeable with contributory See "Aliens."

fault for a collision between one of the boats in their tow and a ferryboat in a fog, through the

direct fault of the ferryboat.-The Chicago (C. CHOSE IN ACTION.

C. A.) 979; The Pencoyd, Id.; The Ashbourne,

Id.; The Townsend, Id. Assignment, see “Assignments."

Libelant's tug held solely in fault for a col

lision with another tug with a tow in ButterCIRCUIT COURTS.

milk Channel shortly after libelant's tug came

out from Atlantic Basin and started up the See "Courts," $ 3.

channel, for violation of article 1 of the pilot rules which required the vessels to pass from

port to port.-The C. C. Clarke (D. C.) 615. CIRCUIT COURTS OF APPEALS.

*A tug passing down the Delaware river on See, "Courts," $ 3.

the east side of Chester Island with two barges on a hawser, and with an ebb tide, held in

fault for a collision between one of such tows CITIES.

and a sloop anchored on the west side of the

channel, for failure to keep sufficiently to the See “Municipal Corporations."

other side of the channel.—The Margaret (D. C.) 1021; The Imperator, Id.; The S. 0. No.

56, Id. CITIZENS.

§ 2. Suits for damages. See "Aliens" ; "Indians"; "Removal of Causes," *Where a collision between vessels occurred § 4.

as the result of the joint negligence of both, Citizenship ground of jurisdiction of United the negligence of one was no defense to the

States courts, see "Courts," $ 3; "Removal of liability of the other.—The Hamilton (C. C. A.) Causes," $ 2.

724; The Saginaw, Id.
Equal protection of laws, see “Constitutional
Law," $ 3.

COMBINATIONS.
CIVIL RIGHTS.

See "Conspiracy."
See “Constitutional Law," § 3.
Denial ground for removal of cause from state

COMITY, court, see "Removal of Causes," $ 3.

Between courts, see "Courts," § 4.

CLAIMS.

COMMERCE Against estate of bankrupt, see "Bankruptcy,” | Carriage of goods and passengers, see “Car$ 6.

riers"; "Shipping." Mining claims, see “Mines and Minerals,” $ 1. To property levied on, see “Attachment, Š 2. 1. Interstate commerce commission.

In a suit by the interstate commerce com

mission to enforce an order restraining the COLLATERAL AGREEMENT. carrying into effect of a reclassification of soap

in less than car loads, the burden held on the Parol evidence, see “Evidence," $ 5.

railroad companies under Interstate Commerce Act Feb. 4, 1887, c. 104, § 14, 24 Stat. 384

[U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 3164] to show that COLLATERAL ATTACK.

the facts were not as found.-Interstate Com

merce Commission v. Cincinnati, H. & D. Ry. On award, see "Arbitration and Award," § 1. Co. (C. C.) 559.

*Point annotated. See syllabus.

[ocr errors]

COMMERCIAL PAPER.

CONFLICT OF LAWS. See "Bills and Notes."

As to actions for wrongful death, see “Death,”

§ 1.

As to contracts, see “Contracts,” § 1.
COMMISSION.

Conflicting jurisdiction of courts, see "Courts,"

§ 4.
Interstate commerce commission, see "Com-
merce,”. § 1.

CONNECTING CARRIERS.
COMMISSIONERS.

See “Carriers," § 2.
See "Court Commissioners."

CONSIDERATION.
COMMISSIONS.

Of contract in general, see “Contracts,” $ 1.
Pf broker, see “Brokers," § 2.

CONSPIRACY.
COMMON CARRIERS.

§ 1. Criminal responsibility.

Where accused was indicted for conspiracy See "Carriers."

to rob the post office at L., evidence was incom

petent to show a general conspiracy, in which COMMON SCHOOLS.

accused participated, to rob banks and every

thing that was "robbable.”—Rabens v. United See "Schools and School Districts," $ 1.

States (C. C. A.) 978.

An indictment against the agents of an inter-
COMPENSATION.

state carrier and the shipper, for giving and

receipt of rebates, held to allege merely a vioFor performance of contract, see "Contracts," lation of the Interstate Commerce Act (Act Feb. $ 2.

4, 1887, c. 104, 24 Stat. 379 [U. S. Comp. Salvage, see "Salvage," $ 1.

St. 1901, p. 3154]) as amended by Elkins

Act (Act Feb. 19, 1903, c. 708, 32 Stat. 817 Þf particular classes of officers or other persons. [U. Š. Comp. St. Supp. 1905, p. 599]), and See "Brokers," § 2.

was therefore not sustainable as charging a Frustee in bankruptcy, see "Bankruptcy," $ 7.

conspiracy to commit an offense against the
United States in violation of Rev. St. § 5140

[U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 3676].—United States
COMPETITION.

v. New York Cent. & H. R. R. Co. (C. C.)

298; Same v. Guilford, Id. Unfair competition, see “Trade-Marks and Trade-Names," $ 2.

On the trial of defendants, charged with conspiracy to defraud the United States, evidence

is admissible to show the state of mind of one COMPLAINT.

charged as a co-conspirator with respect to the

matters to which the alleged conspiracy related n criminal prosecutions, see "Indictment and prior to the date when it is alleged to have been Information."

formed.—United States v. Greene (D. C.) 784.

Letters held admissible in evidence, on the COMPROMISE AND SETTLEMENT. trial of defendants, charged with conspiracy to

defraud the United States, in relation to conSee “Payment”; “Release."

tracts for public work, as tending to 'show an

outside business association and intimacy beCONCLUSION.

tween defendants and their alleged co-conspira

tor, who was the government engineer in charge Pf witness, see "Evidence," $ 6.

of the public work.- United States v. Greene

(D. C.) 787. CONCURRENT JURISDICTION.

*Telegrams and letters passing between al

leged co-conspirators prior to the time of the Pf courts, see “Courts," § 4.

conspiracy charged, but tending to show inti-
mate and improper relations between the par-

ties with respect to the subject-matter of the al-
CONDEMNATION.

leged conspiracy, held admissible on the trial of Faking property for public use, see “Eminent the defendant, to whom they were sent.—United

, C.) . Domain.'

Previous intimacy between persons charged
CONDITIONS.

with conspiracy is competent and important

proof on the trial, and proof of close intimacy is In insurance policies, see "Insurance," § 1. especially important if the duties of the parties

*Point annotated. See syllabus.

1

respectively were intended to be in opposition, 8 3. Equal protection of laws. and, should the occasion arise, might forbid such *Provisions of the New York Gas Commis. intimacy.-United States v. Greene (D. C.) 803. sion Act, Laws 1905, p. 2100, c. 737, $ 21, and

of Laws 1906, c. 125, p. 235, § 3, subjecting Upon the trial of a charge of conspiracy, where gas companies to penalties for charging rates the prosecution depends upon inferences to be in excess of those fixed by the commission or drawn from facts to prove the conspiracy, great by the later act held unconstitutional as deny. latitude of proof must be allowed, and the jury ing to the companies affected the equal protecshould have before them, and are entitled to tion of the laws and a preliminary injunction consider, every fact which has a bearing upon granted restraining their enforcement pending and a tendency to prove the ultimate fact in à suit to test the constitutionality of such issue.—United States v. Greene (D. C.) 803, rates.-Consolidated Gas Co. v. Mayer (C. C.)

150. Evidence reviewed in the charge to the jury on trial of consolidated indictments and counts The unconstitutionality of state legislation severally charging conspiracy to defraud the may be manifested either on its face in its ex United States between contractors for public press provisions or in the manner of enforcing work and the government engineer officer in and carrying it into effect.-Douglas Park Jock charge of the same, the presentation of fraudu-ey Club v. Grainger (C. C.) 414. lent claims against and embezzlement from the United States.- United States v. Greene (D, C.) *Where state officers in the exercise or at 803.

tempted exercise of their official authority deny

to any citizen, whether an individual or a cor CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. poration, the equal protection of the laws of

deprive him of his property without due process

of law, the act is that of the state, and comes Provisions relating to particular subjects. within the prohibition of the fourteenth con See "Eminent Domain," $ 1; "Jury," $ 1. stitutional amendment.-Douglas Park Jockey

Club v. Grainger (C. C.) 414. § 1. Distribution of governmental powers and functions.

The action of the State Racing Cominission *The provision of the sundry civil appropria of Kentucky, created by Act March 26, 1906 tion act of June 4, 1897, c. 2, 30 Stat. 34 | in refusing a license to a racing club to conduc [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p.', 1540] making it a races on its grounds in the exercise of authority criminal offense to violate any rule or regulation claimed under such act, solely on the ground which should thereafter be made by the Secre- that it had previously assigned the date desired tary of the Interior under the power therein by the club to another association, held a denia conferred (since transferred to the Secretary of to such club of the equal protection of the laws Agriculture) for the protection of forest reser- and to deprive it of its property without du vations is void as an attempted delegation of process of law, in violation of the fourteent! legislative power to an administrative officer.- constitutional amendment.-Douglas Park Jock United States v. Matthews (D. C.) 306.

ey Club v. Grainger (C. C.) 414. § 2. Obligation of contracts. A bona fide purchaser of negotiable bonds

CONTEMPT. for value before maturity and without notice of any infirmity therein is entitled as an incident Violation of injunction restraining infringement to his ownership to transfer the title to another

of patent, see "Patents," § 6. with all the rights with which he is vested, and such right once accrued is one of contract which § 1. Power to punish and proceedings cannot be destroyed or impaired by state legis

therefor. lation.—Gamble v. Rural Independent School *On appeal in proceedings for contempt, ques Dist. of Allison (C. C. A.) 113; Rural Inde- tions not presented or decided in court below pendent School Dist. of Allison v. Gamble, Id. are not open to consideration.-Fairfield v. Unit

ed States (C. C. A.) 508. The amendment of 1888 to Iowa Code 1873, $ 2114 (Code 1897, § 3070) which provides that s 2. Punishment. if negotiable paper has been procured by fraud *Accused, having been committed for hi upon the maker no holder shall recover thereon fusal to obey a subpoena duces tecum calling against the maker a greater sum than he paid for his appearance before a grand jury and hav therefor with interest and costs, cannot affecting remained recalcitrant until after the grand the right of one who was at the time of its jury was discharged, he was subject to im passage the bona fide holder of municipal bonds prisonment for a specified term.-United States and entitled to recover their full value to sell v. Collins (D. C.) 553. and transfer such right to another either before or after maturity and the indorsee is en *Where accused was committed for contemp titled to recover the full amount thereon re-in failing to obey a subpoena duces tecum re gardless of the sum paid for the bonds.—Gamble quiring him to appear before a grand jury, the V. Rural Independent School Dist. of Allison term of his imprisonment expired on the dis (C. C. A.) 113; Rural Independent School charge of the grand jury.- United States y Dist. of Allison v. Gamble, Id.

Collins (D. C.) 553. *Point annotated. See syllabus.

CONTRACTS.

A contract between an association and its

secretary to pay him a commission on funds Agreements within statute of frauds, see raised by him for the purposes of the associa"Frauds, Statute of.”

tion construed and held not to entitle him to a Assignment, see "Assignments.”

commission on a subscription made prior to Cancellation, see "Cancellation of Instruments.” his election.-Confederate Memorial Åss'n v. Impairing obligation, see "Constitutional Law," Shaughnessy (C. C. A.) 964. § 2.

$ 3. Rescission and abandonment. Operation and effect of gaming laws, see "Gaming," $ 1.

*In a suit to cancel a contract for the assignParol or extrinsic evidence, see "Evidence,'

ment of the right to operate mutual burial as

sociations under a copyrighted plan, complain$ 5. Restraining performance or breach, see “In-leged false representations which they took no

ants held not entitled to relief because of aljunction," $ 2. Specific, performance, see “Specific Perform- steps to discover promptly prior to the final conance.

summation of the contract.—Burk v. Johnson

(C. C. A.) 209. Contracts of particular classes of persons. *Opinions expressed concerning the rights of See "Master and Servant"; "Seamen."

the holder of a copyrighted plan for the estab

lishment of mutual burial associations, in the Contracts relating to particular subjects.

absence of fraud or bad faith, held insufficient See "Mines and Minerals," $ 2.

to justify a rescission of the contract, though Compensation of seamen, see "Seamen." erroneous.-Burk v. Johnson (C. C. A.) 209.

Particular classes of express contracts. § 4. Performance or breach. See “Bills and Notes"; "Insurance"; "Part

*The exercise by a city of an option to stop nership"; "Sales."

the work of a contractor for the construction Affreightment, see “Shipping,” $ 3.

of a reservoir and to complete the work at the Agency, see "Principal and Agent.”

contractor's expense held to render inapplicable Charter parties, see "Shipping,

provisions of the contract requiring the con

$ 1. Employment, see "Master and Servant."

tractor to obtain a certificate from the director Leases, see' "Landlord and Tenant."

of public works as a condition precedent to a Limitation of liability of carrier by vessel, see question or dispute as to the amount and value

recovery under the contract, and to submit any "Shipping," $ 4. Sales of realty, see “Vendor and Purchaser." of the work done to such director as arbitrator. Stipulations in actions, see "Stipulations."

-Jonathan Clark & Sons Co. v. City of Pitts

burgh (C. C.) 441. Particular classes of implied contracts.

§ 5. Actions for breach, See “Money Received”; “Payment”; “Work In an action by a contractor with a city for and Labor.'

a public work to recover an amount alleged to Particular modes of discharging contracts.

be due under the contract, where the city had

exercised an option given it to stop work by the See "Release.”

contractor and to complete the work at his ex§ i. Requisites and validity.

pense, the burden of proving the cost of such *In a suit for the cancellation of a contract completion does not rest upon the plaintiff, the for fraud, complainants held to have waived presumption being that it did not exceed the the fraud' by delay in rescinding the contract. prices fixed therefor by the contract, unless the -Burk v. Johnson (C. C. A.) 209.

contrary is shown.-Jonathan Clark & Sons Co.

v. City of Pittsburgh (C. C.) 441. *A contract for the construction of certain buildings for a corporation held tainted with il

CONTRADICTION. legality and fraud, precluding a recovery thereon, either for the contract price or the amount of witness, see "Witnesses,” $ 3. originally bid for the work.-Standard Lumber Co. y. Butler Ice Co. (C. C. A.) 359.

CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE. *An order to buy or sell stock on the New Of passengers, see "Carriers,” $ 3; “Shipping," York stock exchange is governed as to the legality of the transaction by the law of New York, of servant, see “Master and Servant,” § 1.

§ 4. and not by that of the place where the order is given.-Berry v. Chase (C. C. A.) 623.

CONVEYANCES. § 2. Construction and operation.

* Although a general term follows specific In trust, see “Trusts,” § 1. words in a contract, it will not be restricted by Conveyances of particular species of, or estates them, under the rule of ejusdem generis, where

or interests in, property. it is apparent from the entire contract that a See "Mines and Minerals," § 2. larger object was in the minds of the parties, to which the general phrase can distinctly apply

Particular classes of conveyances. when given its ordinary meaning.-Lindeke y. See "Assignments"; “Chattel Mortgages”; Associates Realty Co. (C. C. A.) 630.

"Deeds”; “Mortgages.” *Point annotated. See syllabus.

[ocr errors]

COPYRIGHTS.

right to maintain it does not depend on plain

tiff's ownership or previous right of possession. § 1. Nature and acquisition.

-American Tobacco Co. v. Werckmeister (C. *The copyright of a system of by-laws for C. A.) 375. the organization of mutual burial associations In an action under Rev. St. § 4965 (U. S. held not to confer on the owner of the copyright Comp. St. 1901, p. 3414] to recover penalties the exclusive right to operate under the plan for infringement of a copyright for a painting, disclosed.--Burk v. Johnson (C. C. A.) 209. the penalty of $10 therein fixed is recoverable Where complainant copyrighted and published or which is shown by the evidence to have been

for every copy found in defendant's possession a work simultaneously in England and the "by him sold or exposed for sale.”-American United States, the fact that the English work Lithographic Co. v. Werckmeister (C. C. A.) 377. did not contain a reference to the American copyright did not constitute a waiver thereof,

The compiler and publisher of a directory under Rev. St. 88 4956, 4962 [U. S. Camp. St. while he may not copy and reprint matter from 1901, p. 3107].-G. & C. Merriam Co. v. United a prior copyrighted directory as his own may Dictionary Co. (C. C. A.) 354.

use the same for checking up his own canvass,

independently made, and where discrepancies Where the English and domestic editions of are found, after an honest and personal investia copyrighted book were not the same, the pub- gation of the same, may publish the result lisher of the English edition was prohibited by as so verified as his own.-Hartford Printing Rev. St. $ 4963 (U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 34121, Co. v. Hartford Directory & Publishing Co. from inserting therein a notice of the domestic (c. C.) 332. copyright.-G. & C. Merriam Co. v. United Dictionary Co. (C. C. A.) 354.

*Where, on a comparison of a copyrighted

directory and an alleged infringing publica*Under Rev. St. $ 4952, as amended by Acttion, it appears that a large proportion of the March 3, 1891, c. 565, 26 Stat. 1106 [U. S. errors in the former are also found in the latter, Comp. St. 1901, p. 3406), which authorizes the such evidence is suffcient to refute the testiproprietor of any painting, etc., “or assigns of mony of defendant's witnesses that the accuracy any such person,” to obtain a copyright thereon, of ail items in its directory was personally verthe owner of a painting may transfer to an- ified and to show_that direct copying had been other by assignment the right of copyright, al- done.—Hartford Printing Co. v. Hartford Dithough the assignee does not become the owner rectory & Publishing Co. (C. C.) 332. of the painting.-- American Tobacco Werckmeister (C. C. A.) 375.

Where the infringing parts of a directory are

intermingled with other parts, about which there *Act June 18, 1874, c. 301, 18 Stat. 78 [U. is no evidence and defendant makes no effort to S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 3411], relating to notice of separate them, it must account for all profits copyright, does not require such notice to be made on the entire sales.-Hartford Printing Co. placed upon the original of a copyrighted paint. v. Hartford Directory & Publishing Co. (C. C.) ing or upon its mount but only upon the copies 332. thereof.-American Tobacco Co. v. Werckmeister (C. C. A.) 375.

CORPORATIONS. § 2. Infringement. *An infringement of a copyright may result Right to sue for libel, see “Libel and Slander,”

$ 1. in the wrongful use of a part as well as the whole of a copyrighted publication.-G. & C. Particular classes of corporations. Merriam Co. v. United Dictionary Co. (C. C. See “Exchanges”; “Municipal Corporations”; A.) 354.

"Railroads"; "Street Railroads." Rev. St. U. S. & 4956 [U. S. Comp. St, 1901, Insurance companies, see "Insurance.” p. 3407], held not applicable to the reproduction in the United States of a book copyrighted in $ 1. Members and stockholders. England, containing no notice of an American *A contract made by a private corporation copyright on a similar book intended for publi-on a sale of its property business and good cation in the United States.-G. & C. Merriam will that it will not again engage in business Co. v. United Dictionary Co. (O. C. A.) 354.

in competition with the purchaser is not binding Publication in the United States of a pho- individually on a stockholder even though he tographic reprint of a dictionary published in may have been an officer acting for the corporaEngland as well as the United States from a tion in the transaction.—Hall's Safe Co. v. copy imported from England for that purpose Herring-Hall-Marvin Safe Co. (C. C. A.) 37. held an infringement of complainant's copyright.-G. & C. Merriam Co. v. United Diction

$ 2. Corporate powers and liabilities. ary Co. (C. C. A.) 354.

*The acceptance by the directors of a corpora

tion of a proposition for a purchase of its An action by the owner of the copyright for stock, secured by a broker, held to constitute a painting brought under Rev. St. $ 4965 [U. S. a ratification of a contract with the broker for Comp. St. 1901, p. 3424], for a forfeiture of the commissions made by the secretary of the corplates and copies of an infringing publication, poration without authority.---Bauersmith v. Ex: is not the statutory action of replerin, and the treme Gold Min. & Mill. Co. (C. C.) 95.

*Point annotated. See syllabus.

« ΠροηγούμενηΣυνέχεια »