| Show I f BILLBOARD COMPANY WINS SUIT f fi i I Queer Murder Clue Story Entitled A Life for a Life Condemns a Man Judge Coxe of New YorkGives Ruling as to a Professional Sculptor l In an action by the Gunning system tlinst the city of Buffalo to restrain 1 fvfc dcstrucion of advertising boards I corporation counsel urged as objection I objec-tion against the billboards that these j structures erected upon vacant lots high will be a place of resort for lewd and vicious characters a place where nul linces are committed and also a place of deposit for rubbish and all kinds l of liltb and refuse whereby the peace and 1 safety as well as the health of thc public pub-lic will be endangered But the court Nosy York Supreme court appellate di IFlon held that these objections did f rot constitute grounds for the destruction destruc-tion of the billboards as a nuisance j Conceding for the purpose of argument I argu-ment said the court that the proptoO of the afliant will come true there Is no suggestion upon the record thai such things have happened and there Is no reason to suppose that if such things do happen the nuisance if Il is one cannol be abated some other ttay than by the destruction of the signboards sign-boards Gunning System vs City of Buffalo II N Y Supp 155 I n A story entitled A Life for a Life1 bearing a close resemblance to the true narrative of a murder In Michigan was found in a bov of silverware In the poss sO bsion of a man suspected of burglary nid with the story as a clue he was tried and convicted of the murder II UES contended by counsel for defendant thit the mere fact thai there was a similarity ic f sim-ilarity between the story and the real murder was not sufficient to render the story admissible in evidence on the trial for murder But on appeal the Supreme court held that whether or not the story showed knowledge on the part of the defendant of the murder was a question to be determined by the Jury and should admitted The judgment of conviction was affirmed People vs Higgjns 86 N W Rep S12 f A resident of Massachusetts was married mar-ried to a resident of New York and removed re-moved to that State where she resided for some years after which she returned re-turned to Massachusetts and regained her residence there and obtained a divorce di-vorce on the ground of cruelty Her hushaid was served in New York but 1 did not appear in the action but continued i con-tinued to live In I New York until his death Or these facts the New York Supreme court appellate division held that the Massaghnsetts decree was not binding I on the plaintiff in 1 New York and hence I 1 did not bar her right to dower in the I husbands lands in New York Star buck vs Starbuck 71 N Y Supp 104 I H 6 The expression of an unfavorable opinion of the goods of its competitor I r ly i a rival concern In letters or circulars 1 I ig 1 not a ground for libel holds Judge Dallas of the United States Circuit t I I court E D Penn in the cpse of Nonpareil T Non-pareil Cork Manufacturing company O03 Fed Rep 721 as such expressions are not uncommon among rivals In irade and their correctness In each instance I f in-stance is for determination by those Y whose custom sought and not by the I courts o < 6 Iii I-ii An insurance company cannoUlegally refuse to pay an agent his commissions j tolely on the ground that it had Decided to change Its I rate and to chage a f higher l one after he had performed the 1 services required of him in procuring the Insurance according to the UnIted States Circuit Court of Appeals in the I case of Currlor vs Mutual HesPIP Fund Life Association 10S Fed Rep i 137 In this case the agent procured applications for insurance in accordance I accord-ance with his Instruction and with the rules and regulations of the company and forwarded them to the home office i f of the defendant for Its action upon I them The applications were in due I form and it Is to be presumed that the applicants were insurable risks and that the risks were satisfactory to the company No objection to them was i pointed out and the presumption is i that none existed The only objection j made delivering the policies was that I the rale of premium on them was too t i low The court held that on these facts the 1 ordinary rule In regard to agents ap pliedthat is that while an agent is not usually entitled to hIs commissions until un-til the transaction is complete yet If he hns faithfully performed pnrt of the transaction and from no fault of his own but by the refusal of the principal prin-cipal I to complete the I contract It Is not consummated the agent will be entitled to his commissions a Statues fut carved and wrought by hand from a solid block of marble by a person who is I a graduate of a rocogiilzed school of art are statuary I statu-ary the work of a professional sculp I i tor within the terms of 1 paragraph I I 551 of the tariff act of 1S97 holds Judge Li Coxe of the Circuit court Southern ulstrlfrt New York in the case of g I Tounsend va United States lOS Fed m J wp SOl and entitled t to entrY as 3 cJoh without regard to the purpose for 2 I which they are to be used the degree 1 l t of artistic merit limy possess 01 the 1 fact that they are copied from the 1 work oc other iuliJlls I f S < t Th6 granting of a patent is prIma 1 facie evidence of the utility of the In vention holOs HIP Circuit Court of Appeals In the case of Crown Cork and Seal company vs Aluminum ctru coru In Wny IOS Fel l Rep 845 and to sus 01 lain thy defense of want of utility in a i nut for infringement the defendant muL Show pither that it is thcorcti j LII y impossible for the dovlrp of the atont to operate or demonstrate by n d tjcav proof that a person skilled In the art i nas endeavored 1 loecl In good faith to make tie Invention work and has been J liTable 1 1 to do SOand the court further Jwlrlthat a j 1 that an abandonment of an In l emipn to he public which will defeat a t I sVV3lLqUent Patent therefor is not i5 1 CRtnljiishcd i > y evidence that the Iti fmor temporarily abandoned tixperi U J niniqlRhich had to that time proved uc 1 unsuccessful where he subsequently I 1 th JRunH them > successfully perfected f the device aid applied forIl patent IL I therefor before any Averse rights ac j cruPr1 I 9 A A fair association which maintained 151 t a race track on Its fair grounds negli 1 V gently made an opening In the fence i unrounding the track and through I this opening a horse ran from the 114 1 track among the people assembled on inc main part of the fair ground InV In-V Kno of tha spectators The cot Appellate court of Indiana held the fair association liable for the Injury r ij 1 on the ground that the cause of the try Injury i was the failure to inclose prop 212 erly the tract Wlndeler vs Rush i ouiUy Lair nnsoclalJon M N E Rep ilO S S Where a person claims a status of citizenship under the naturalization I 753 laws of the United States Judge Board r fllttfl ° f the United States District court 0 Louisiana in the case of Slmonc 108 SB have Fed Rep arj holds that the courts Jurisdiction claim n jurisdicton to determine euoh notwithstanding that it may nave been adversely determined by the immigration S olttcers S o The renewal by n new note of a 54C Usurious note but excluding all the o4 usury is held by the Supreme Judicial I I court of Maine In the case Vcrmule vo Vcrmultf 10 All Rep MS to ren der the new note valid and binding on the maker as the parties themselves have done what a court of equity would require them to do I A structure connecting two build ings on opposite sides of a street built so far above the street ns not to inter fore with traffic thereon Is held by the Court of Appeals of Maryland In the case of Townsend vs Epstein 19 All Rep 62D to be a nuisance asto adjacent ad-jacent propertyowneis whose light is obstructed I S u Where a person IB I Induced to support another during several years by her fraudulent pretenses that she was destitute des-titute when In fact she had a consid eral estate in bank the Court of Errors Er-rors and Appeals of New Jersey In the case of Anderson m Eggcis 19 All Rep G78 holds that he is entitled to be recompensed out of the estate for to the her money and property so furnished A I a I 1 A judgment obtained against an insolvent In-solvent within four months of filing a petition on which ho is adjudged a bankrupt Is void holds the Appellate court of Indiana in the case of Sevcrln vs Robmsnn GO N E Rep 966 I 3 6 O Whoa one places a bank of dirt on his own land above his neighbors the Supreme court of Michigan In the case of Abrey vs City of Detroit SGN W Rep 785 holds that he is bound to erect a retaining wall sutllcient to ore vent the dirt from encroaching This rule apples to municipalities as well ns to Individual The fact that one hay built n brick foundation to his house Is not an Invitation to his neighbor or a municipality lo bank earth agalnsC it V b SIn S-In an action for damages against the proprietor of n theater on the ground that the manager refused to allow an officer to serve 1 writ on an actor engaged en-gaged In the theater the evidence showed that the officer entered the outside out-side door of the rear part of the theater thea-ter where he was met by the manager with two other men who stood against the door to the stage and refutwd to allow the officer to enter On tho trial the court directed a verdict for the proprietor of the theater and on appeal ap-peal the Supreme court Rhode Island affirmed the judgment One ground of tho decision was tluit the injury if I any was not due to the refusal of the manager to allow the officer to enter I but the failure of the officer to serve I his writ a he might and should have done The court said that the build I ing in which the affair took place was not a dwellinghouse and the officer door 1C he had a had entered the outer I valid writ he had the right to break doors and command sufficient force to enter after having requested admit tance and being refused Paulton vs Kcith H All Rep C35o A Sunday contract cannot be made valid by ratification upon a week day ruled the Supreme court of Michigan in the case of Acme fi Co vs Van Der beck 86 N W Rep7SG There must be evidence from which the jury can find an Independent contract between the parties aside from the legal one on Sunday I Linda Doea woman of the town was prosecuted by William Deason because be-cause she had he claimed failed to pay a hack bill that she owed Linda who went to the matinee had asked Deason to call for her when the show was over but when the woman looked around for the hack she did not find it and was forced to walk home For this reason she did not thinkUhat the complainant had a case agaInst her and as the Judge was also of the same opinion the wpmtin was discharged much to the chagrlh of the hackman S S Chris Jensen was of the opinion that j I no mistake had been made when he I I had been arrested for being drunk He i alleged however that some lime ago ago he had been leaded while working in the Bmcllcr nt Murray and that he had been advised to try whisky as a curatIve cura-tive I worked all right he thought but he found ho had gotten an overdose over-dose and tat was bad U was said the Judge and us this is not your first offense it will cost you 5 4 IJ C Frantzen you are coming nlueh too oren and if you continue in your mad Career 1 shall have to raise the limit You will escape with a ilve doLlar fine this Ime though H S 1 John Ryan was charged with tres paatf in that he had gone to sleep upon another mans piece of ground He admitted ad-mitted that he was guilty and sail he would not have offended had he not been overloaded and tired He was a mjner from Montana and was real anxious lo get back there or go to Blngham The cOurt advised him tog to-g to Binghnm and he said he would S o I I Louis P Kclsoy j was charged with i assault antl battery upon George E Klll0f the abstract firm Qf Moyle Hill Hill il ajipcaied from his testimony testi-mony had taken down an abstract to Kelsey and had sllld to him that when he paid Ihe bill accompanying it he coUld have I Itelscy denied owing the bill at all and J2I1I heft Hill Claimed thai TCelaey followed him up I Ihb street and forcibly took the abstract ab-stract from his pocket at the same time being very rough 5n his manner from a physical standpoint Kolsey Bald he took the abslrael because I be-cause he thought he had a right to t it but he ute l no force nor violence of any kind Lhc abstract Kelsey claimed belonged to him or was at least recently lirLthe possession of his 1 I firm oirlhc ue of a client and he claimed that Hill had no business to refuse to give 11 lo hjm 11 do hot Ihluk aaldjbe Judge In passing upon the icaso < that Mr Kelsey Kel-sey ured such force as would warrant nie In Imposing any mnishnient for as euult and iaLttryaid that Is what ho Is charged with but I do bdlleVo he ahoujd Jiave taken l other mean to se clime the paper The defendant Is discharged dis-charged S I r S 5 4 Mabel Wllllamy who rooms at 216 J South Stale Hlrcot was charged with I the theft of 5 from p D IvingBtpn WJIQ I < Allc ame place Mabel denied I 1 her guilt Jut the Cldenc ewent to show that slfe t and the cOmplain ilot hiid dnjoyoda Hot tie of cocktails togelheri und Ihal he had sent out COll fr cduple of mrahj Giving the messen get boy 10 Tho lud relurnedaU the I monoy but 175 and LIvJngsLonsald j Jic had given JLbo won an 1 the silver I and laid h 5 0h piece on the dresser Vhcn he turnednfoulul again it was I 6ne J I The woman strenuously denied tnt i 1 ipg the mpneybulthe Judge did not I believe Ifcj1 story and assessed a Ono I I pfr2T frhmyhich saysher auorney I Juciice peal LcIeshe will probably ap J I < 5 S o I There Were nife v short cases J and the dock ended |
