ACCOUNT-A bill against two trustees to compel each to account
for so much of the proceeds of certain property as came into his
hands was filed by one who was entitled to an aliquot part of each
fund.-Held, that neither of said trustees could complain because
the person who was entitled to the remainder of each fund was
not made a party, nor could either of the defendants file a cross-
bill for the purpose of calling upon the other defendant to ac-
count for the fund in his hands. MCCLAIN'S EXECUTORS v. BAB-
BITT
ADULTERY-A husband knew that his wife had been visiting at
the house of her paramour, who was a young man several years
her junior, and knew that he was visiting her. She had been
married ten years, borne two children, and had not shown any
disposition to go astray. The father of such paramour warned
such husband as to his wife's conduct several months before the
commencement of the suit. He did nothing to arrest his wife's
course, but waited, observing and obtaining information, and on one
occasion permitted such paramour to accompany her to a theatre,
and spoke of him as her best man. A detective was employed to
watch them, and, shortly after a report of improper relations, suit
for divorce for the wife's adultery was begun.-Held, insufficient
to show connivance or acquiescence of petitioner barring a divorce,
as he was justified in waiting to know the truth before acting.
BROWN v. BROWN..
See DIVORCE.
ALIMONY-1. Although a decree for alimony does not reserve to the
parties a right to apply for a modification of the amount awarded
when the circumstances of the parties have changed, yet, under
the true construction of the Divorce act, the chancellor may
entertain an application of that kind. RIGNEY v. RIGNEY.......
Such application may be by petition in the cause and must
be supported by proof of such changed circumstances as justify
and require a variation of the amount of alimony allowed. Id...
A defendant who resists and evades the enforcement of the
decree for alimony would not be permitted to procure a reduction
of the amount allowed because of changed circumstances, except
upon performance of the decree up to the time when the circum-
stances are shown to justify reduction. Id......
When a defendant has continued to resist the enforcement
of the decree up to the time of his death, the court will not enter-
tain the application of his personal representative for a reduction
of the alimony which has accrued. Id....
Where, by articles of separation, a husband covenants to
pay to his wife a certain sum per month for her support and she
agrees to accept such payments in satisfaction of alimony, she
may maintain an action in her own name to recover past-due
sums. MOCKRIDGE v. MOCKRIDGE.
On decree of divorce for a wife of middle age and in good
health, and in great part supporting herself, in the absence of
any reason showing why permanent alimony should be allowed, an
order for the same will not be made. ABELE v. ABELE..
ANNULMENT OF MARRIAGE-1. When a bill in equity for the
annulment of a marriage for a cause not within the Divorce act
has been taken pro confesso in the absence of any special rule on
the subject, the proper practice is to take an order directing com-
plainant to produce proof to sustain the allegations of the bill
and to set down the cause for hearing. CRANE v. CRANE....... 21
To annul a marriage for a fraudulent representation induc-
ing the contract, it must be shown that the fraud affected an es-
sential of the marital relation. Id......
APPEAL-1. An order made by the chancellor under the "Act em-
powering executors and trustees, holding land and real estate in
trust, to improve the same and erect buildings thereon," approved
April 9th, 1897 (P. L. of 1897 p. 190), is appealable. IN RE
MILLER
Where the proof leaves it doubtful that an improvement
proposed under said act will be beneficial to the trust it should
not receive judicial sanction. Id.......
ATTORNEY AND CLIENT-An attorney is bound to deal with his
client with frankness, and to render her an itemized account of
his receipts and disbursements of her moneys paid to him. KEL-
LEY V. REPETTO.
BENEFICIAL ASSOCIATION-See INTERPLEADER, 2.
Distinguished, Broadway Insurance Co. v. Doying, 36 Vr. 69., 74
Chesapeake and Ohio Railway Co. v. Atlantic Transportation
Co., 17 Dick. Ch. Rep. 369.
Reversed, Chesapeake and Ohio Railway Co. v. Atlantic
Transportation Co.
Congregational Church v. Benedict, 14 Dick. Ch. Rep. 136.
Affirmed, Congregational Church v. Benedict.
Donald v. American Smelting, &c., Co., 16 Dick. Ch. Rep. 458.
Greenville, &c., Railway Co. v. Grey, 46 Atl. Rep. 636, 638.
Reversed, Greenville, &c., Railway Co. v. Grey..
Kellogg v. Scott, 13 Dick, Ch. Rep. 344.
Affirmed, Kellogg v. American Insurance Co....
Kelsey v. New England Street Railway Co., 15 Dick. Ch. Rep. 230.
Affirmed, Kelsey v. New England Street Railway Co....... 742
McClain's Executors v. Babbitt.
CHATTEL MORTGAGE-See INSOLVENT CORPORATIONS, 4, 5, 6.
CLAIMS-Between parties holding claims equally equitable, he who
has also the legal title must prevail, when required to defend his
rights in a court of equity. FORMAN v. BREWER'S EXECUTORS... 749
See INSOLVENT CORPORATIONS, 8-11; RECEIVER.
CONDEMNATION PROCEEDINGS-A railroad company acquir-
ing land by condemnation, and paying the award of the commis-
sioners into court, is entitled to have all liens on the land, includ-
ing liens for taxes, paid out of such fund, though the lienors are
not parties to the proceedings. IN RE SLEEPER.
CONFESSION-A divorce will not be granted on the uncorrobo-
rated confessions of adultery by the defendant, though such con-
fessions are non-collusive. RLOMAN v. KLOMAN.
CONTEMPT-1. Where one is guilty of a contempt of court by re-
moving fixtures from a mill of which he is in possession, while
under an injunction restraining such removal, and it appears that
an order of restoration of the removed equipment would be an
ineffectual remedy because the removed equipment has to some
extent been injured, and in some instances destroyed, the party
in contempt, in addition to a restoration, must meet any expendi-
ture of money required to remedy the wrong done. ASHBY V.
ASHBY
Where one commits a contempt of court by removing fix-
tures from a mill of which he is in possession, while under an
injunction forbidding such removal, he will not only be compelled
to restore the fixtures and make reparation for damage done to
the injured party, but a punishment will be imposed because of
the offence to the dignity of the court, and the punishment to be
inflicted for the offence to its dignity will depend on the conduct
of defendant in regard to the reparation for the injury. Id..... 618
A punitive order of the court of chancery, fining or im-
prisoning a party for contempt, is not appealable if the matter
and party be within the jurisdiction of the court. GRAND LODGE
v. JANSEN.
A remedial order of the court of chancery, made in contempt
proceedings is appealable.
On an application to the court of chancery to obtain, in pro-
ceedings for contempt, a remedial order directing the imprison-
ment of the defendant until he shall pay a money decree, it is
proper for the defendant to show his inability to pay, and, if that
be shown, an order for such imprisonment ought not to be made.
Id.
CONTRACT-1. Complainant and defendant, by agreement in writing,
agreed, inter alia, (1) that defendant, on the conveyance to a com-
pany which he was to organize, of the assets of an insolvent cor-
poration, which defendant had offered to purchase, would give
complainant three notes of the new company, payable one, two
and three years from date, to be endorsed by A, B and defendant
in the order named; and (2) that he would execute a general
release to complainant of all claims and demands. Complainant,
on his part, in consideration of the fulfillment of defendant's
agreement, agreed (1) to give a release to defendant from all
claims against the company or defendant, except on the notes;
(2) to purchase and assign to defendant, claims of two other
named creditors against the insolvent corporation; (3) to assign
all complainant's shares (three hundred and ninety-six) in the
insolvent corporation, and (4) to give his services in bringing
about reorganization. Complainant did give these services. De-
fendant refused to perform the agreement.-Held, (1) defend-
ant's claim that the agent who executed the agreement on his
behalf had no authority to do so, not sustained upon the evi-
dence; (2) equitable jurisdiction exists for the specific perform-
ance of the defendant's contract to purchase the shares and
claims and also of the agreement for general release, and inas-
much as the consideration for the defendant's contract is entire
and must be wholly performed on the part of the complainant,
jurisdiction to do full and complete justice, on the whole con-
tract, exists, and damages for the refusal to give the notes may
be given in connection with decree for specific performance.
LYLE v. ADDICKS..
A bill to enforce payment of a specified sum out of money
claimed to be due from defendant to a person who had contracted
with him to erect certain buildings, the complainant's right to
which sum was charged to have arisen from an equitable assign-
ment thereof by an order, drawn by the contractor, upon defend-
ant requiring him to pay complainant that sum from money due
or to become due to the contractor in accordance with the terms
of the contract and duly presented to the defendant, must show
that the contractor had so performed his contract that, but for
the order, he could recover the sum from the defendant. GOLDEN-
GAY . SMITH....
If the bill is defective in that respect, the defect is suffi-
ciently pointed out by a general demurrer for want of equity.
Id.
Quare. Whether such an order will operate as an equitable
assignment of money due to the contractor not upon the contract,
but by reason of the actual acceptance of the buildings by defend-
ant; but, if so, the bill must charge that money had thus become
due to the contractor which he could recover in assumpsit or on
a quantum meruit. Id....
CORPORATION-See DIRECTORS' LIABILITY; INSOLVENT CORPO
RATIONS; STOCK.
COVENANT-1. Where a general scheme of land improvement is an-
nounced to invited purchasers of lots, and part of the promulgated
scheme is the declaration that a named portion of the lands
within the general plan shall be devoted to special purposes,
|