Page images

tions or the complaint held sufficient to ad-1 A passenger may alight from his train at a
mit certain evidence as to the character of the switch track near an intermediate station with
place where the cattle were kept.-Atchison, out forfeiting his status.—Texas Midland R.
T. & S. F. Ry. Co. v. A. S. Veale & Co. (Tex. R. v. Ellison (Tex. Civ. App.) 213.
Civ. App.) 202.

In an action against a carrier for refusal to
In an action against a carrier for keeping stop a train and permit plaintiff to aligbt at a
cattle, after arrival at destination, in unsuitable point to which she had purchased a ticket, held,
pens, held, that evidence as to the market price that plaintiff was not misled into getting upon
at the nearest place having a market was ad- the wrong train.—Texas & P. Ry. Co. . Bel
missible.-Atchison, T. & S. F. Ry. Co. v. (Tex. Civ. App.) 730.
A. S. Veale & Co. (Tex. Civ. App.) 202.

A passenger with means of ascertaining
In an action against a carrier for damages whether a train will deliver him at his destina-
for the holding of cattle in unsuitable pens tion held bound to avail himself of his opportu-
after arrival at destination, the measure of nity to enter the right conveyance.—Texas & P.
damages determined.-Atchison, T. & S. F. Ry. Co. v. Bell (Tex. Civ. App.) 730.
Ry. Co. v. A. S. Veale & Co. (Tex. Civ. App.)

§ 6. Personal injuries.
In an action for damages to live stock by

It is not sufficient that a street car should
delay in transit, evidence of actual loss in value stop a reasonable time for passengers to aligti,
of the animals held competent, where there but the carrier's servants are bound to see that
was no market at their destination.—Texas & no person is in the act of alighting, or is in a
P. Ry. Co. v. Ellerd (Tex. Civ. App.) 362.

dangerous position, before putting the car in

motion.—Little Rock Traction & Electric Co.
In an action for damages to live stock by de- v. Kimbro (Ark.) 121, 614.
lay in transit, evidence that plaintiff told de-
fendant's agent that he wished to enter the

Carriers are not insurers of the safety of
stock at a fair held improper under the plead- passengers, nor bound to protect them against
ings.- Texas & P. Ry. Co. v. Ellerd (Tex. Civ. accidents caused by their own acts or omis
App.) 362.

sions, but are required to exercise a high de

gree of care to secure their safety.- Little
Evidence held not to show that there was a Rock Traction & Electric Co. v. Kimbro
market for animals at their place of destination, (Ark.) 121, 644.
so as to preclude a recovery for depreciation
in actual value.- Texas & P. Ry. Co. v. Ellerd sickness caused by riding in a smoking car at

A passenger held not entitled to recorer for
(Tex. Civ. App.) 362.

the direction of a porter.-Brezewitz 5. St.
In an action against a carrier for injuries to Louis, I. M. & S. Ry. Co. (Ark.) 127.
cattle in transit, petition held sufficiently spe-
cific in its allegations of damage.- Texas &

In an action for injuries to a passenger, the
P. Ry. Co. v. Sherrod (Tex. Civ. App.) 363.

petition held sullicient to support a verdict for

plaintiff on the theory of negligence, with an
Measure of damages for injury to cattle in unproved allegation of willfulness eliminated
transit held determined by market value at des -Cramer v. Springfield Traction Co. (Mo.
tination.— Texas & P. Rý. Co. v. Sherrod (Tex. App.) 24.
Civ, App.) 303.

In an action for injuries to a passenger of 2
In an action against a carrier for damages street car by the premature starting thereof as
to a shipment of live stock, held, that the differ- she was attempting to alight, plaintiff's eri-
ence in the market value at the place of desti- dence held sufficient to make out a prima facie
nation was the correct measure of damages.- case.-Cramer v. Springfield Traction Co. (Mo.
Missouri, K. & T. Ry. Co. of Texas v. Kyser App.) 24.
& Sutherland (Tex. Civ. App.) 389.

In an action for injuries to a passenger while
An instruction that a shipper was entitled to alighting from a street car, the motorman Arif
damages for “rough handling” of live stock by not guilty of negligence as a matter of law in
the carrier held not cured by an instruction failing to see that plaintiff was in the act of
making recovery depend on negligence. — Ft. alighting when he started the car.-Cramer v.
Worth & D. C. Ry. Co. v. James (Tex. Civ. Springfield Traction Co. (Mo. App.) 24.
App.) 730.

In an action for injuries to a passenger og
An instruction authorizing recovery of such a street car, an instruction that it was tbe
damages as "might have” resulted from unrea- duty of the motorman to have observed plaiz.
sonable delay or rough handling of a carrier tiff until she reached the street in safety te
held erroneous.-Ft. Worth & D. C. Ry. Co. v. fore starting the car held error.-Cramer 5.
James (Tex, Civ. App.) 730.

Springfield Traction Co. (Mo. App.) 24.
§ 5. Carriage of passengers.

In an action for injuries to a passenger, mod.
A carrier held, under a contract, only bound ification of an instruction with reference to the
to use reasonable diligence in forwarding an-

cause of plaintiff's injuries held not error.-
other carrier instructions to deliver a ticket Flynn v. St. Louis Transit Co. (Mo. App.) 50
to plaintiff, and not liable for delay of the
other carrier in delivering the ticket after the passenger, was prima facie proof that the en-

That a locomotive boiler exploded, injuring a
instructions had been received.-Brezewitz v. gine was unsafe or mismanaged.-Kelly v. Chi-
St. Louis, I. M. & S. Ry. Co. (Ark.) 127.

cago & A. Ry. Co. (Mo. App.) 583.
Contract of carriage held a through one to a On an issue of negligence in maintaining a
certain station and city.-Hubbard v. Mobile & defective step on a passenger car, testimony
0. Ry. Co. (Mo. App.) 52.

that witness spoke to third parties of the de
Rev. St. 1899, $ 5222, relative to connecting R. R. v. Ellison (Tex. Civ. App.) 213.

fective step held inadmissible.- Texas Midland
carriers, held inapplicable to contract of
carriage made in Ilinois, and consequently Undue prominence held not given to the char
governed by the laws of that state.--Hubbard acter of duty 'required of a conductor bs para-
V. Mobile & 0. Ry. Co. (Mo. App.) 52.

graphs of a charge in an action for injury to a
An assault committed by a street car conduc, T. C, R. Co. v. Copley (Tex. Civ. App.) 219.

passenger while boarding a train.-Houston
tor on a passenger held a continuing one, and
that the relation of carrier and passenger had In an action for injuries to a passenger, hvis
not entirely terminated when plaintiff was kick- proper to refuse an instructiou that painti
ed by the conductor after he had alighted. - could not recover if the injuries were the re
Flynn v. St. Louis Transit Co. (Mo. App.) 500. sult of any other cause than that complaint



of.-St. Louis Southwestern Ry. Co. of Texas, cover exemplary damages.-Little Rock Tracv. Martin (Tex. Civ. App.) 387.

tion & Electric Co. v. Winn (Ark.) 1025. In an action for injnries to a passenger, a A passenger held entitled to recover for expulphrase by way of illustration in an instruction sion from a train, owing to refusal of agent to held not to have rendered it erroneous.—St. lindorse a return trip ticket.—Texas & P. Ry. Louis Southwestern Ry, Co. of Texas v. Martin Co. v. Payne (Tex. Sup.) 330. (Tex. Civ. App.) 387.

That a passenger, ejected for refusing an unIn an action for injuries to a passenger, an warranted demand for fare, had sufficient instruction held not to have made the defend- money with him, held admissible on the question ant an insurer of the absolute safety of passen-' of damages.—Texas & P. Ry. Co. v. Lynch gers. — St. Louis Southwestern Ry. Co. of Tex- : (Tex. Civ. App.) 884. as v. Martin (Tex. Civ. App.) 387.


§ 9. Passengers' effects. In an action against a carrier for injuries to

Evidence as to the loss of a passenger's baga passenger from the discharge of hot cinders gage held sufficient to make a prima facie case. from a locomotive, evidence held sufficient to

-Hubbard v. Mobile & 0. Ry. Co. (Mo. App.) show that the engine was negligently handled 52. and that such negligence was the proximate cause of the escape of the cinders.—Missouri, Petition against a carrier for the loss of K. & T. Ry. Co. of Texas v. Mitchell (Tex, / baggage held not converted into a petition for Civ. App.) 841.

negligence by mere allegation that the baggage Carrier held liable for injury to passenger for 0. Ry. Co. (M0. App.) 52.

was lost by negligence.-Hubbard v. Mobile & failure to furnish car capable of being made comfortably warin. - Missouri, K. & T. Ry. The mere fact that a passenger received her Co. of Texas v. Foster (Tex. Civ. App.) 879. baggage from a terminal association, and not

from the carrier. held not to show that the In an action for injuries to a passenger by i latter's liability, both as carrier and as ware being struck by a car door, plaintiff held en; houseman, had ceased.—Hubbard v. Mobile titled to recover in the event the proof showed & 0. Ry. Co. (Mo. App.) 52. some degree of negligence on defendant's part on any one or more of the grounds alleged in In an action against a carrier for the loss the petition.---Texas & P. Ry. Co. v. Leakey of baggage, the burden is on the carrier to (Tex. Civ. App.) 1168.

show facts reducing its liability to that of ware

houseman.-Hubbard v. Mobile & O. Ry. Co. $ 7.

Contributory negligence of (Mo. App.) 52. person injured.

A carrier which agrees to transport a pas In an action for injuries to a passenger, an

senger and baggage to destination is responsiinstruction held erroneous for failure to define ble throughout the journey for the loss of the plaintiff's negligent conduct, referred to as not baggage by itself or by any other carrier.constituting a defense in case it was not the Hubbard v. Mobile & O. Ry. Co. (Mo. App.) immediate cause of the injury:-Little Rock 52. Traction & Electric Co. v. Kimbro (Ark.) 121, 644.

The status of warehouseman sets in and that

of carrier ceases when the passenger has had In an action for injuries to a passenger, in a reasonable time in which to take his bagstructions held erroneous as excluding the ques gage away.-Hubbard v. Mobile & 0. Ry. Co. tion whether, in the exercise of reasonable (Mo. App.) 52. foresight, the conductor should have anticipated that plaintiff would be injured by alight- either as carrier or warehouseman, for a pas

Carrier under a through contract is liable, ing from the car when in motion, as he did.Little Rock Traction & Electric Co. v. Kim- senger's baggage until it delivers the same.bro (Ark.) 121, 614.

Hubbard v. Mobile & 0. Ry. Co. (Mo. App.)

52. In an action against a street railroad company for injuries to a passenger, an instruction

Jewelry carried in a woman's trunk, for on the care required of defendant held defective wear, may be found by a jury to be baggage.and misleading.-Little Rock Traction & Elec- Hubbard v. Mobile & 0. Ry. Co. (Mo. App.) tric Co. v. Kimbro (Ark.) 614.

52. A passenger on a street car held justified,

A carrier's common-law liability for baggage by the custom of disobeying an ordinance re

embraces only such articles as are baggage in quiring street cars to stop on the far crossing, a technical sense.—Hubbard v. Mobile & 0. to suppose the car, stopping before it had reach- Ry. Co. (Mo. App.) 52. ed the far crossing, had stopped to let her off. Carrier held an insurer against every loss of -Franklin v. St. Louis & M. R. R. Co. (Mo. baggage, except one due to the act of God or Sup.) 930.

of a public enemy: -Ilubbard v. Mobile & 0. Passenger, guilty of contributory negligence Ry. Co. (Mo. App.) 52. in attempting to board a moving train, could not recover, whether he was negligent in other

CASE CERTIFIED OR RESERVED. respects or not.--Texas Midland R. R. v. Ellison (Tex, Civ. App.) 213.

For determination of questions of law, see "ApPassenger, boarding a moving train, knowing peal and Error," $ 7. it was dangerous to do so, held guilty of con- Sulliciency of certified question, see "Appeal tributory negligence in law.—Texas Midland and Error," § 11. R. R. v. Ellison (Tex. Civ. App.) 213. Though a passenger alighted when the train

CATTLE. was moving, it was a question for the jury See “Animals." whether he was guilty of contributory negligence.-St. Louis Southwestern Ry. Co. of Texas v. Ratley (Tex. Civ. App.) 407.


Ejection of passengers and in- See "Railroads," $ 5.

truders. In an action for ejection of a passenger from

CAUSE OF ACTION. a street car, on the ground that his transfer was too late, plaintiff held not entitled to re- See “Action."

87 S.W.-77


that where the mortgage was recorded.-Sca-

ling v. First Nat. Bank (Tex. Civ. App.) 715.
See “Affidavits."

Mortgagee held entitled to sue one who con-
As evidence, see "Evidence," $ 10.

verts mortgaged property, regardless of the
Certified copies, see “Evidence," $ 10.

question of other security.-Scaling v. First
Land certificate, see “Public Lands," $ 1.

Nat. Bank (Tex. Civ. App.) 715.
Mutual benefit insurance certificate, see "In-
surance,” 11.

The measure of a mortgagee's damages for

the conversion of the mortgaged property by a
Of acknowledgment of written instrument, see
"Acknowledgment," 8 1.

stranger is the amount of his debt, if that be
Of case or question of law for determination, less than the value of the property converted. -
see "Appeal and Error," $ 7.

Scaling v. First Nat. Bank (Tex. Civ. App.)


8 4. Foreclosure.

In a suit to foreclose a mortgage, the court
Review of discharge on habeas corpus, see

had no jurisdiction to enter an order of sale
"Habeas Corpus," $ 1.

before judgment of foreclosure. -- Tipton v.
Review of primary election contest, see "Elec-

Harris (Ky.) 1074.
tions," $ 3.

In a suit to foreclose a chattel mortgage, a
Review of proceedings to form school district, judgment of foreclosure against a certain de
see "Schools and School Districts," § 1. fendant is not authorized, in the absence of a

finding in favor of plaintiff for a foreclosure
$1. Proceedings and determination.
Certiorari brings up for review only the rec. (Tex. Civ. App.) 712.

against such defendant.--Martin v. Berry Bros.
ord of the tribunal to which it is directed, and
not the evidence; nor can the evidence be con-

Testimony describing cattle mortgaged to
sidered, even though included in the return.-

plaintiff and sold to defendant held to show
School Dist. No. 2, Tp. 24, R. 6 E., Butler that they were the cattle covered by the mort.
County, v. Pace (Mo. App.) 580.

gage in question. --Scaling v. First Nat. Bank
(Tex. Civ. App.) 715.

Petition to foreclose mortgage on cattle held

not to vary from the mortgage.-Scaling v.

First Nat. Bank (Tex. Civ. App.) 715.
To juror, see "Jury," $ 2.

A mortgagee of cattle which belonged to the

mortgagor individually cannot be postponed in

the collection of its debt to the adjustment of

eguities existing between the mortgagor and his
See “Equity.”

partner. -Scaling v. First Nat. Bank (Tex. Civ.

App.) 715.

Of civil action, see "Venue," $ 1.

See “Property.”
Of criminal prosecutions, see “Criminal Law,"
$ 2.


Part payment by, see "Accord and Satisfac-
Of accused in criminal prosecutions, see "Crim-

inal Law," $ 7.

Of witness, see "Witnesses," 3.

See "Abduction"; "Bastards"; "Guardian and

Ward";., “Infants”; "Parent and Child";

To jury in civil actions, see “Trial,” 887–10.

Injuries to, see "Negligence," § 1.
To jury, in criminal prosecutions, see “Crim-
inal Law," 8 18.


Assignment, see "Assignments."
Right of mortgagee as against attaching credit-

or. see "Attachment," $ 3.
Verdict in action to foreclose, see “Trial,” g 12. See “Courts," $ 3; “Justices of the Peace,"
& l. Requisites and validity.

Under Rev. St. 1895, art. 3327, held, that on
a sale of chattels, possession being given the

purchaser, a verbal reservation of title to secure
the purchase money constituted a valid mort- Establishment of lost deed, see "Lost Instru-
gage between the parties.-Crews v. Harlan ments."
(Tex. Sup.) 656.

Instructions, see “Criminal Law,” | 18.
Mortgage of cattle held to sufficiently describe
the mortgaged property.-Scaling v. First Nat.

Bank (Tex. Civ. App.) 715.

See “Process."
§ 2. Construction and operation.

Failure of the county clerk to discharge his
duty ir respect to mortgages duly, filed with See "Municipal Corporations."
him does not affect the mortgagee's rights.-
Scaling v. First Nat. Bank (Tex. Civ. App.)

8 3. Rights and liabilities of parties. Equal protection of laws, see “Constitutional

A stranger who converts cattle covered by Law," 8 7.
duly recorded mortgage held liable, although Privileges and immunities, see "Constitutional
the conversion took place in a state other than Law," $ 6.

[ocr errors]


See “Constitutional Law,” $$ 3, 6, 7.

Carriage of goods and passengers, see "Car-

Under Kirby's Dig. $ 6622, it is not necessary
that railroads furnish the same accommodations & 1. Power to regulate in general.
at stations for the white and colored race, but
the statute merely prohibits discrimination.— by which interstate commerce shall be governed.

Congress has the power to prescribe the rules
Choctaw, O. & G. Co. v. State (Ark.) 426.

-Barnhard Bros. & Spindler v. Morrison
Indictment against a railroad, under Kirby's (Tex. Civ. App.) 376.
Dig. $8 6622, 6634, 6636, for failing to main-
tain equal and sufficient passenger accommoda- & 2., Subjects of regulation.
tions at a station, held defective.-Choctaw, 0. Whisky shipped out of the state, in order to
& G. R. Co. v. State (Ark.) 426.

be reshipped into the state to evade the local
option law, is not the subject of interstate com-

merce.—Crigler v. Commonwealth (Ky.) 276.

Express company which carried a C. 0. D.
See "Replevin."

shipment of liquor from a foreign state into a

local option territory and there held it a week

before delivering it to the consignee held to be-

come a bailee of the liquor, and could not de-
Against estate assigned for creditors, see “As- subsec. 4, on the ground that the shipment was

fend a prosecution under Ky. St. 1903, $ 2557,
signments for Benefit of Creditors," $ 1.
Against estate of decedent, see "Executors and monwealth (Ky.) 1111.

interstate commerce. --Adams Exp. Co. v. Com-
Administrators," $ 4.
Against school district, see "Schools and School Interstate commerce defined.-Barnhard Bros.
Districts," $ 1.

& Spindler v. Morrison (Tex. Civ. App.) 376.
To property levied on, see “Attachment," 8 3.

§ 3. Means and methods of regulation.

Municipal ordinance requiring improvement

contracts to require the work of stone dressing

to be done within the state held not to violate
See "Constitutional Law," § 6.

interstate commerce clause of the federal Con-

stitution.-Allen v. Labsap (Mo. Sup.) 926.

A foreign corporation may send its agents

into this state without procuring the certificate
See “States," § 2.

required by Rev. St. 1895, arts. 745, 746,-

Barnhard Bros. & Spindler v. Morrison (Tex.

Civ. App.) 378.

Foreign corporation cannot ship goods to
See “Quieting Title."

agents in the state for sale without complying
Wrongful delivery of escrow, see "Escrows." with Rev. St. 1895, arts. 745, 746.–Barnhard

Bros. & Spindler v. Morrison (Tex. Civ. App.)

See "Associations."


Inquisition of lunacy, see “Insane Persons,"

8 1.

To take testimony, see “Depositions."
On decree in suit to try tax title, see "Taxa-

tion," $ 7.
On order for sale of decedent's property, see

"Executors and Administrators," 8 5.

Of General Land Office, see "Public Lands," 1.

Of General Land Oflice, mandamus, see "Man-

damus," § 1.
See "Frauds, Statute of," § 1; "Guaranty."


Of agent, see “Principal and Agent," $ 2.
Of costs, see “Costs," 8 4.

Of broker, see “Brokers," $ 3.
Of estate of decedent, see "Executors and Ad-Of executor or administrator, see "Executors
ministrators," $ 3.

and Administrators," $ 7.
Of taxes, see "Taxation," $$ 3, 4.


See "Carriers."
Appropriations for, see “States," $ 3.


See “Drunkards."
With street car, see “Street Railroads," $ 1.


Agister's lien, see "Animals."
To sustain adverse possession, see "Adverse Liability of carrier, see “Carriers,"..9 9.

Presumption as to, see "Evidence," "$ 2.

[ocr errors]

See “Monopolies," 8 Le

See "Schools and School Districts," $ 1


See "Husband and Wife," $ 3.

See “Abduction," § 1.
Division on divorce, see "Divorce," $ 3.

Documentary evidence, see "Criminal Law,"

8 6.

See “Negligence," $ 3.

Taking property for public use, see “Eminent


For performance of contract, see “Contracts,"
$ 2.

See “Sales," 8 7.
For property taken for public use, see "Emi-
nent Domain," $ 2.

For services, see “Master and Servant," $ 2.
Of agent, see “Principal and Agent," $ 2.

Condemnation proceedings as condition preced-
Of attorney, see “Attorney and Client," $ 3.
Of broker, see “Brokers," $ 3.

ent to right to construct railroad, see "Emi-
Of executor or administrator, see “Executors In conveyance of right of way, see “Railroads,"

nent Domain," $ 3.
and Administrators,” 8 7.

8 4.
Of guardian ad litem, see “Infants," $ 2.

In deeds, see "Deeds," 8 2.
Of receiver, see “Receivers,” $ 5.
Of state officers, see “States," $ 2.

In insurance policies, see "Insurance," &$ 3, 4.
In appeal bonds, see "Appeal and Error," § 23.

In mortgages, see "Mortgages," $ 4.

Precedent to action for breach of warranty,

see “Sales," $ 6.
Of evidence in civil actions, see "Evidence," Precedent to lease of public lands, see "Public
8 4.

Lands," $ 1.
Of evidence in criminal prosecution, see "Crim- Precedent to membership in beneficial associa-
inal Law," 88 6–12.

tion, see "Insurance," § 11.
Of juror, see "Jury," $ 2.
Of witnesses in general, see "Witnesses," § 1.


Admissibility in evidence, see “Criminal Law,"

f 11.
In criminal prosecution, see “Indictment and Instructions, see "Criminal Law," § 18.


See “Compromise and Settlement."

Disclosure of communications, see "Witnesses,"

8 1.


Of tax title, see “Taxation," 8 7.
See “Accord and Satisfaction"; "Release."
Power of attorney, see "Attorney and Client,"
$ 2.

Evidence held insufficient to sustain a finding See “Limitation of Actions," $ 1; "Trusts," $ 1.
of mutual mistake, authorizing the setting aside
of a compromise. --Willingham v. Jordan (Ark.) Contract for transportation of passenger, see

“Carriers," 8 5.

Liability for injuries to servant, see "Master
Compromise agreement between vendor and

and Servant," $ 3.
vendees construed, and held to extinguish ven-
dees' debt, so that any claim to lien on house
removed from land during vendees' possession

was ipso facto canceled, notwithstanding res-
ervation that nothing therein should prejudice One held entitled to recover all of mingled
vendor's claim to the house.-Moody v. Gaston logs, under the doctrine of confusion.—Mengal
(Tex. Civ. App.) 224.

Box Co. v. Moore & McFerrin (Tenn.) 415.


Of interest, see “Interest," $ 2.

See “Carriers,” $$ 2, 5, 9.
Of period of limitation, see "Limitation of Ac-

tions," 8 2.
Of time, see "Time.”


See “Rape.”

To search, see "Searches and Seizures."
Effect on limitation, see “Limitation of Ac
tions," $ 2.


Of contract, see “Contracts," $ 1.

Of conveyance to child, see "Parent and Child."
Of indictment, see “Indictment and Informa- Parol evidence, see “Evidence," $ 11.
tion," $ 1.

To support claim of bona fide purchaser, see
Of witness, see "Evidence," $ 12.

"Vendor and Purchaser," $ 4.

« PreviousContinue »