text:
    No. 8917.
    The Cincinnati & Dayton Railway Co. v. The Miami & Erie Transportation Co.
    (Decided March 28, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Butler county.

      Messrs. Probasco & Probasco and Messrs. Shotts & Millikin, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. Ford, Henry, Snyder & McGraw and Messrs. Shepherd & Shaffer, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Price and Summers, JJ., concur.


source: Caselaw Access Project

license: Public Domain

text:
    No. 8918.
    Tobias v. Richardson et al.
    (Decided March 28, 1905.)
    Error to Cicuit Court of Crawford county.

      Mr. Smith W. Bennett, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. Finley & Gallinger; Mr. C. F. Schaber and Mr. W. J. Schwenck, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, Price, Crew, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 8919.
    The Fulton Building Co. v. Spangler et al.
    (Decided March 28, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Cuyahoga county.

      Messrs. Weed & Miller, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. McKisson, Grosser & Curtis; Messrs. Brewer, Cook & McGowan and Mr. T. H. Garry, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Dayis, C. J., Shauck, Price, Crew and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 8925.
    Dunkel v. Smith, Admr.
    (Decided March 28, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Clark county.

      Mr. Geo. Arthur, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. Cochran, Rodgers & Cochran; Messrs. Beard & Summers and Mr. F. E. James, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, Crew and Spear, JJ., concur.

Summers, J., not sitting.


text:
    No. 8928.
    The Mica Insulator Co. v. Ford, Receiver.
    (Decided March 28, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Richland county.

      Messrs. Kerr & La Dow, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs., Cummings, McBride & Wolfe, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Price, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 8929.
    The Logan Natural Gas & Fuel Co. v. Wiler et al.
    (Decided March 28, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Richland county.

      Mr. L. T. Neal and Messrs. Cummings, McBride & Wolfe, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. Brucker & Cummins, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed on the ground that the petition in error was not filed in time.

Price, Crew and Spear. JJ concur.


text:
    No. 8930.
    Zeithaml, an Infant, by etc. v. The Greeley Bros. Co.
    (Decided March 28, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Cuyahoga county.

      Messrs. Toland & Howell, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. White, Johnson, McCaslin & Cannon, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price, Crew, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 8993.
    State ex rel. Ellis, Attorney General, v. Deputy State Supervisors of Cuyahoga County et al.
    (Decided March 28, 1905.)
    Quo Warranto.

      Mr. Wade H. Ellis, for plaintiff in error.

      Mr. C. Kinney; Mr. H. F. Payer; Messrs. Blandin, Rice & Ginn and Mr. E. J. Blandin, for defendants in error.
   Demurrer to second defense of answer sustained and judgment of ouster as to defendants, Gongwer and Coughlin, and order of induction of Gentsch and Fitzgerald.

Davis, C. J.. Shauck, Price, Crew and Summers, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9184
    Amsbaugh v. Carpenter et al.
    (Decided March 28, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Richland county.

      Mr. J. M. Reed and Messrs. Beach & Kramer, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. Douglass & Workman; Mr. C. H. Huston and Mr. Wade Ellis, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Crew, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 8600.
    The Union Savings Bank & Trust Co., Trustee, v. Casey.
    (Decided April 4, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Hamilton county.

      Mr. L. C. Black and Mr. M. R. Waite, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. Campbell & Clen Dening, for defendant in error.
   Judgment of the circuit court reversed and judgment of the court of common pleas affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price, Crew, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 8631.
    The Addyston Pipe & Steel Co. v. Campbell.
    (Decided April 4, 1905.)
    Error to Superior Court of Cincinnati.

      Messrs. Robertson & Buchwalter and Messrs. Paxton & Warrington, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. Shag & Cogan, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Price, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 8635.
    The Baltimore & Ohio Southwestern Railroad Co. v. Juneman.
    (Decided April 4, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Ross county.

      Mr. Edward Barton and Mr. J. P. Phillips, for plaintiff in error.

      Mr. C. R. Doll and Mr. Elijah Cutright, Jr., for defendant in error.
   Judgment of the circuit court reversed and judgment of the court of common pleas affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 8637.
    McGraw v. The Springfield Railway Co.
    (Decided April 4, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Clark county.

      Mr. G. C. Rawlins and Mr. C. V. Collins, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. Martin & Martin, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price, Crew and Spear, JJ., concur.

Summers, J., not sitting.


text:
    No. 8678.
    Knealing v. Wooler et al.
    (Decided April 4, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Hamilton county.

      Messrs. Kennedy, Munger & Kennedy and Messrs. Herron, Gatch & Herron, for plaintiff in error.

      Mr. J. C. Healy; Mr. D. F. Cash and Mr. F. J. Dorger, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, Crew and Spear, JJ., concur-


text:
    No. 8686.
    Tucker v. Watts.
    (Decided April 4, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Wood county.

      Mr. Gilbert Harmon; Mr. C. R. Painter and Mr. S. D. Tucker, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. Baldwin & Harrington and Mr. J. O. Troup, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, Crew and Srear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 8941.
    City of Columbus v. The Federal Gas & Fuel Co.
    (Decided April 4, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Franklin county.

      Mr. J. M. Butler and Messrs. Sater & Sater, for plaintiff in error.

      Mr. F. A. Durban; Mr. F. H. Southard and Messrs. Dyer, Williams & Stoufer, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 8949.
    The National Candy Mould & Mfg. Co. v. The Weston Paper & Mfg. Co.
    (Decided April 4, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Montgomery county.

      Mr. O. F. Davisson and Messrs. Rowe & Shuey, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. Gottschall & Limbert, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Crew, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 8953.
    Peters v. Carrothers.
    (Decided April 4, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Hancock county.

      Mr. Jason Blackford, for plaintiff in error.

      Mr. G. F. Pendleton and Mr. M. G. Foster, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Crew and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 8954.
    Chapman, Trustee, v. Skinner, Treasurer.
    (Decided April 4, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Jackson county.

      Mr. J. M. McGillivray, for plaintiff in error.

      Mr. A. E. Jacobs, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price, Crew and Spear, JJ.. concur.


text:
    No. 8955.
    Chapman v. Skinner, Treasurer.
    (Decided April 4, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Jackson county.

      Mr. J. M. McGillivray, for plaintiff in error.

      Mr. A. E. Jacobs, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price, Crew and Summers, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 8956.
    The Superior Coal Co. v. Skinner, Treasurer.
    (Decided April 4, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Jackson county.

      Mr. J. M. McGillivray, for plaintiff in error.

      Mr. A. E. Jacobs, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price, Crew and Summers, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 8957.
    The Tom Corwin Coal Co. v. Skinner, Treasurer.
    (Decided April 4, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Ja'ckson county.

      Mr. J. M. McGillivray, for plaintiff in error.

      Mr. A. E. Jacobs, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price, Crew and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 8958.
    The Machine Coal Co. v. Skinner, Treasurer.
    (Decided April 4, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Jackson county.

      Mr. J. M. McGillivray, for plaintiff in error.

      Mr. A. E. Jacobs, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price, Crew and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 8959.
    Patterson, Trustee, v. Skinner, Treasurer.
    (Decided April 4, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Jaekson county.

      Mr. J. M. McGillivray, for plaintiff in error.

      Mr. A. E. Jacobs, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price, Crew and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 8966.
    Rundell et al. v. The Ohio Savings Bank & Trust Co. et al.
    (Decided April 4, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Lucas county.

      Messrs. Smith & Beckwith and Messrs. Cole, Whitlock & Milroy, for plaintiffs in error.

      Messrs. Hamilton & Kirby, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price, Crew, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 8978.
    Malaney et al. v. The City of Toledo et al.
    (Decided April 4, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Lucas county.

      Mr. F. J. Flagg; Mr. P. A. MacGahan and Mr. W. H. A. Read, for plaintiffs in error.

      Mr. U. G. Denman; Mr. C. K. Friedman and Mr. Chas. Milroy, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price, Crew, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9372.
    State ex rel. Stolzenbach v. Feltz, Auditor.
    (Decided April 4, 1905.)
    Mandamus.

      Messrs. Wheeler & Bentley, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. Klinger & Secrest, for defendant in error.
    Demurrer to petition overruled and peremptory writ of mandamus awarded as prayed in petition.
    Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price, Crew, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 8591.
    The George Worthington Co. v. Schwan, Assignee, et al.
    (Decided April 11, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Cuyahoga county.

      Messrs. Kline, Carr, Tolles & Goff, for plaintiff in error.

      Mr. L. J. Grossman; Mr. E. C. Schwan and Mr. H. J. Caldwell, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Price and Summers, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9001.
    Schanabruch et al. v. Lothamer, Admrx.
    (Decided April 11, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Stark county.

      Mr. M. L. Smyser, for plaintiffs in error.

      Mr. C. T. Meyer, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, Price and Summers, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9008.
    Smith v. Central Union Telephone Co. et al.
    (Decided April 11, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Ashtabula county.

      Messrs. Perry & Roberts, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. Hoyt, Munsell & Hall and Mr. R. W. Calvin, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck and Summers, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9012.
    Breining v. Wall et al.
    (Decided April 11, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Cuyahoga county.

      Messrs. Noble, Pinney & Williard, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. Meyer & Mooney, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price and Summers, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9113.
    The State of Ohio v. Stoker et al.
    (Decided April 11, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Auglaize county.

      Mr. Wade H. Ellis and Mr. Smith W. Bennett, for plaintiff in error.

      Mr. John Schoonover, for defendants in error.
   Judgment reversed and judgment for plaintiff in error.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price, Crew, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9244.
    Sims & Co. v. Frecs.
    (Decided April 11, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Mahoning county.

      Mr. E. N. Brown, for plaintiff in error.

      Mr. W. R. Stewart and Mr. H. T. Smith, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price, Crew, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 8662.
    The Cleveland Punch & Shear Works Co. v. The Consumers’ Carbon Co.
    (Decided April 18, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Fairfield county.

      Messrs. Carpenter, Young & Stocker; Mr. J. S. Sites and Mr. C. W. McCleery, for plaintiff in error.

      Mr. M. A. Daugherty and Mr. G. E. Martin, for defendant in error.
   Judgment vacated and cause remanded to circuit court with direction to consider the hill of exceptions.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price, Crew, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 8883.
    The Guarantee Savings & Loan Co. et al. v. Sayle, Receiver.
    (Decided April 18, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Cuyahoga county.

      Mr. S. W. Bennett and Messrs. Smith & Taft, for plaintiffs in error.

      Messrs. Carpenter, Young & Stocker, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price, Crew and Summers, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9021.
    Cockrell, Guardian, v. Davis et al.
    (Decided April 18, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Franklin county.

      Messrs. Sloane & Horst, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. Pugh & Pugh, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck and Price, JJ., concur.

Summers, J., not sitting. •


text:
    No. 9034. No. 1.
    Macke et al. v. The Gest Street Building Assn.
    (Decided April 18, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Hamilton county.

      Mr. D. Wulsin and Mr. W. C. Meyer, for plaintiffs in error.

      Mr. D. F. Cash; Mr. J. C. Healy and Mr. F. J. Dorger, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price and Summers, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9035.
    Jacobs v. The State of Ohio, etc.
    (Decided April 18, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Jackson county.

      Mr. S. F. White and Mr. A. E. Jacobs, for plaintiff in error.

      Mr. Elmer C. Powell, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck and Price, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9096.
    Mercurio v. The State of Ohio.
    (Decided April 18, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Cuyahoga county.

      Mr. C. W. Noble and Mr. M. B. Earnhart, for plaintiff in error.

      Mr. H. R. Keeler, for defendant in error.
   Judgment reversed for error in overruling the challenge to Juror Julius Renker, on authority of Palmer v. State, 42 Ohio St., 596.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price, Crew, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9098.
    Heintz v. Caldwell.
    (Decided April 18, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Hamilton county.

      Mr. Mortimer Matthews, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. Johnson & Levy, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

•Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price, Crew and Summers, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9250.
    The City of Cincinnati et al. v. The Cincinnati Union Stock Yards Co.
    (Decided April 18, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Hamilton county.

      Mr. C. J. Hunt and Mr. A. H. Morrill, for plaintiff in error.

      Mr. F. C. Ampt, for defendant in error.
   Judgment reversed and judgment for plaintiff in error.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9299.
    The State of Ohio v. Fronizer.
    (Decided April 18, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Sandusky county.

      Mr. H. C. DeRan, for plaintiff in error.

      Mr. J. R. Bartlett; Mr. E. B. King and Mr. C. A. Seiders, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price, Crew and Summers. JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9300.
    The State of Ohio v. Hunt.
    (Decided April 18, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Sandusky county.

      Mr. H. C. DeRan, for plaintiff in error.

      Mr. J. R. Bartlett; Mr. E. B. King and Mr. C. A. Seiders, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price, Crew and Summers,, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 8709.
    Boyd et al. v. Joecken et al.
    (Decided May 2, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Cuyahoga county.

      Messrs. Carpenter, Young & Stocker and Mr. F. G. Kassulker, for plaintiffs in error.

      Messrs. M. B. & H. H. Johnson; Mr. G. H. Kelly and Messrs. Ford, Snyder & Henry, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, Crew" and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 8775.
    Smith v. Ewing et al.
    (Decided May 2, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Allen county.

      Messrs. Poe & Poe and Messrs. Cable & Parmenter, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. Ridenour & Halfhill, for defendants in error.
   Judgment reversed. Grounds stated in journal entry.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 8791.
    Johnson et al. v. Boise.
    (Decided May 2, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Medina county.

      Messrs. Elliott & Elliott, for plaintiffs in error.

      Messrs. Gilbert, Hills & Vanderveer, for defendant in error.
   Judgment reversed and that of the common pleas court affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price, Crew and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 8837.
    The Dayton & Union Railroad Co. v. The Dayton & Muncie Traction Co. et al.
    (Decided May 2, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Darke county.

      Messrs. R. M. Nevin, C. V. Heiserman and J. C. Clark, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. Anderson, Bowman & Anderson, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price and Summers, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 8838.
    The Dayton & Union Railroad Co. v. The Dayton & Muncie Traction Co.
    (Decided May 2, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Darke county.

      Messrs. B. M. Nevin, C. V. Heiserman and J. C. Clark, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. Anderson, Bowman & Anderson, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price and Summers, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9007.
    Brockway v. Brockway et al.
    (Decided May 2, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Ashtabula county.

      Messrs. Ford, Snyder & Henry and Messrs. Berry & Roberts, for plaintiff in error.

      Mr. H. J. Redmond; Mr. H. E. Starkey and Mr. N. G. Hyde, for defendants in error.
   Judgment reversed. Grounds stated in journal entry.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price and Summers, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9037.
    The Fireman’s Insurance Co. of Newark, N. J. v. Boland et al.
    (Decided May 2, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Allen county.

      Mr. J. W. Mooney, for plaintiff in error.

      Mr. J. P. Hanley, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Price, Crew and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9048.
    Flaugher v. Boyd.
    (Decided May 2, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Adams county.

      Mr. D. B. Phillips; Mr. Arthur Tucker and Mr. W. R. Mahaffey, for plaintiff in error.

      Mr. William Anderson; Mr. W. S. Foster and Mr. W. H. Ellis, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9052.
    Wilson v. Wilson.
    (Decided May 2, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Fayette county.

      Mr. H. B. Maynard and Mr. V. V. Barnes, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. Post & Reid, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9082.
    Fleming v. Morningstar et al.
    (Decided May 2, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Darke county.

      Mr. H. M. Cole and Messrs. Robeson & Yount, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. Anderson, Bowman & Anderson, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Price and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9089.
    Robert H. Jeffrey, Mayor, v. State ex rel. Butler.
    (Decided May 2, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Franklin county.

      Mr. N. C. Kingsbury; Mr. G. B. Okey; Messrs. Gumble & Gumble; Messrs. Shunk & Thompson and Messrs. Squire, Sanders & Dempsey, for plaintiff in error.

      Mr. J. M. Butler; Messrs. Voris, Vaughan & Vaughan; Mr. W. B. Wheeler; Mr. A. V. Taylor; Mr. Thomas Clark; Mr. L. D. Lilly; Mr. W. H. Ellis and Mr. G. H. Jones, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price, Crew, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 8287.
    Wilkofsky et al. v. Rowland
    (Decided May 9, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Mahoning county.

      Messrs. Arrel, McVey & Robinson, for plaintiffs in error.

      Messrs. Murray & Koonce and Mr. M. C. McNab, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price Crew and Summers, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 8707.
    The City of Akron v. Day et al.
    (Decided May 9, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Summit county.

      Mr. C. F. Beery and Mr. S. D. Kenfield, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. Musser & Kohler, for defendants in error.
   Judgment reversed for error in overruling demurrer to second defense.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Crew, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 8735.
    The North American Accident Insurance Co. v. Gulick.
    (Decided May 9, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Mahoning county.

      Messrs. Arrel, McVey & Tayler, for plaintiff in error.

      Mr. T. W. Sanderson, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price, Crew and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 8926.
    The State of Ohio v. Norris.
    (Decided May 9, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Clark county.

      Mr. J. B. McGrew and Mr. M. T. Burnham, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. Keifer & Keifer, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Price and Crew, JJ., concur.

Summers, J., not sitting.


text:
    No. 9041.
    Ralston v. The City of Defiance.
    (Decided May 9, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Defiance county.

      Mr. J. W. Slough and Mr. B. B. Kingsbury, for plaintiff in error.

      Mr. W. D. Hill, for defendant in error.
   Judgment reversed and judgment for the plaintiff in error.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price and Summers, JJ., concur.


text:
    No, 9053.
    The Cobb-Bradley Realty Co. v. Hare.
    (Decided May 9, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Cuyakoga county.

      Messrs. Pinney & Warner, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. Olds & Willet, for defendant in error.
   Judgment vacated and cause remanded with instructions to consider the bill of exceptions.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price and Crew, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9055.
    The City of Defiance v. Eding.
    (Decided May 9, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Defiance county.

      Mr. W. D. Hill and Mr. Robert Newbegin, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. Ansberry & Farrell, for defendant in error.
   Judgment reversed and judgment for plaintiff in error.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price and Summers, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9060.
    Walton, Admx. v. The Metropolitan Life Insurance Co.
    (Decided May 9, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Lucas county.

      Mr. O. S. Brumback, for plaintiff in error.

      Mr. G. B. Boone, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price and Crew, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9104.
    The Youngstown Mfg. Co. v. Snyder, a Minor, by etc.
    (Decided May 9, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Mahoning county.

      Mr. A. E. Seaton and Mr. T. H. Gillmer, for plaintiff in error.

      Mr. T. McNamara and Mr. E. H. Moore, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Price, Ckew and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9115.
    The City of Dayton v. Cory.
    (Decided May 9, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Montgomery county.

      Mr. E. P. Matthews and Messrs. McMahon & McMahon, for plaintiff in error.

      Mr. C. H. Kumler and Messrs. Nevin, Nevin S Kalbfus, for defendant in error.
   Judgment reversed. Grounds stated in the journal entry.

Davis, C. J., Price, Crew, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9195.
    Ayers v. The City of Toledo et al.
    (Decided May 9, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Lucas county.

      Mr. B. A. Hayes, for plaintiff in error.

      Mr. U. G. Denman; Mr. F. G. Crane and Messrs. Smith & Balter, for defendants in error.
   Judgment reversed. Grounds stated' in the journal entry.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price, Crew, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 8710.
    Weiler v. The Village of Oakley et al.
    (Decided May 16, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Hamilton county.

      Mr. J. R. Jordan; Mr. J. M. Walsh and Messrs. Coppock & Hertenstein, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. Ampt, Ireton & Collins and Messrs. Burch & Jolmson, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price and Summers, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 8723.
    The City of Toledo v. Bloom.
    (Decided May 16, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Lucas county.

      Mr. U. G. Denman and Mr. C. K. Friedman, for plaintiff in error.

      Mr. Peter Emslie, for defendant in error.
   Judgment of the circuit court reversed and that of the common pleas affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price, Crew and Summers, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 8888.
    Hopple v. Hopple.
    (Decided May 16, 1905.)
    Error, to Circuit Court of Hamilton county.

      Messrs. Burch & Johnson and Messrs. Harmon, Colston, Goldsmith & Hoadly, for plaintiff in error.

      Mr. M. F. Wilson; Mr. E. G. Kinkead and Messrs. Johnson & Levy, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Price, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 8934.
    Moorehouse v. Gates et al.
    (Decided May 16, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Richland county.

      Messrs. Moorehouse, Donnell & Marriott, for plaintiff in error.

      Mr. J. M. Reed and Messrs. Jenner & Weldon, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Price and Summers, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 8935.
    Colwell Hardware Co. v. Providence-Washington Insurance Co.
    (Decided May 16, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Eichland county.

      Messrs. Bowers & Black, for plaintiff in error.

      Mr. G. M. Cummings and Mr. J. W. Mooney, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Price and Summers, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 8942.
    Taylor v. Akron Hydraulic Press Brick Co. et al.
    (Decided May 16, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Cuyahoga county.

      Mr. J. W. Taylor and Mr. T. H. Garry, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. Henderson, Quail & Siddall; Mr. T. H. Hogsett; Messrs. Weed & Miller; Messrs. Smith & Taft and Messrs. Solders & Solders, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Price and Summers, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 8951.
    The Board of Education of Lane School District v. The Board of Education of Franklin School District.
    (Decided May 16, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Warren county.

      Messrs. Runyan & Stanley, for plaintiff in error.

      Mr. P. H. Rue, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, Crew and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 8961.
    The Contractors’ & Builders’ Supply Co. v. The Alta Portland Cement Company.
    (Decided May 16, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Logan county.

      Messrs. Howenstine & Huston, for plaintiff in error.

      Mr. J. R. Cassidy and Mr. J. P. Bower, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, Crew and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 8963.
    The Lumbermen’s Mutual Insurance Co. v. Goodrich, Receiver, et al.
    (Decided May 16, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Crawford county.'

      Mr. Jason Blackford and Mr. C. H. Keating, for plaintiff in error.

      Mr. Thomas Beer and Messrs. Carter & Goodrich, for defendants in error.
   Judgment vacated and cause remanded to circuit court with direction to consider the bill' of exceptions.

Shauck, Crew and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 8991.
    McArthur v. Bowers.
    (Decided May 16, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Richland county.

      Mr. C. H. Workman and Mr. John W. Jenner, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. Cummings, McBride & Wolfe, for defendant in error.
   Judgment reversed and that of the court of common pleas affirmed on the doctrine of the dissenting opinion in Gillette v. Tucker, 67 Ohio St., 106.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Crew and Summers,, JJ., concur.

Price and Spear, JJ., dissent.


text:
    No. 9071.
    Morgan v. Wakelin.
    (Decided May 16, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Cuyahoga county.

      Mr. E. Sowers, for plaintiff in error.
    Messrs. Blandin, Rice & Ginn, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

° Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price, Crew, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9073.
    Andrew et al. v. Mitchell.
    (Decided May 16, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Greene county.

      Mr. T. L. Magruder and Mr. H. L. Smith, for plaintiffs in error.

      Messrs. Snodgrass & Schnebly, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed on authority of Strauch v. The Massillon Stoneware Co., 71 Ohio St., 295.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price, Crew, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9074.
    The Columbus Sanitary Works Co. v. Edwards.
    (Decided May 16, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Franklin county.

      Messrs. Bargar & Bargar and Mr. S. C. Jones, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. Page, Page & Page, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price, Crew and Summers, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9077.
    The Hanover Fire Insurance Co. v. Jobe.
    (Decided May 16, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Greene county.

      Mr. Ben. S. Johnson, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. Darlington & Darlington and Mr. H. B. LeSourd, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price, Crew and Summers, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9078.
    Grant et al. v. Sterling.
    (Decided May 16, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Stark county.

      Mr. R. H. Day, for plaintiffs in error.

      Messrs. Sterling & Braucher, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price, Crew and Summers, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9156.
    Kemper, Admr., et al. v. Couden, Admr.
    (Decided May 16, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Hamilton county.

      Mr. W. W. Smith, Jr.; Messrs. F. H. & W. M. Kemper and Messrs. Pogue & Pogue, for plaintiffs in error.

      Mr. T. C. Welch and Mr. W. A. Hicks, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Crew and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9210.
    The New England Co. v. Scanlon.
    (Decided May 16, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Cuyalioga county.

      Messrs. Russell & Eichelberger and Messrs. Henderson, Quail & Siddall, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. Blondín, Bice £ Givm, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price, Crew, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9239.
    Martin v. The Pittsburg & Lake Erie Railroad Co.
    (Decided May 16, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Mahoning county.

      Messrs. Murray & Koonce and Mr. W. S. Anderson, for plaintiff in error.

      Mr. J. P. Wilson, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price, Crew and Summers, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9415.
    The State of Ohio v. Stolberg et al.
    (Decided May 16, 1905.)
    Exceptions to the Common Pleas Court of Lucas county.

      Mr. W. G. Ulery and Mr. J. S. Martin, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. Doyle & Lewis; Messrs. King & Tracy and Messrs. Brown, Geddes, Schmettau & Williams, for defendants in error.
   Exceptions overruled on authority of Slingluff v. Weaver, 66 Ohio St., 621; Woodbury & Co. v. Berry, 18 Ohio St., 456, and Hough v. Mfg. Co., 66 Ohio St., 427.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price, Crew, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 8677.
    Isham et al. v. The Buckeye Stave Co.
    (Decided May 23, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Lucas county.

      Mr. A. H. Coldham and Mr. W. A. Owen, for plaintiffs in error.

      Messrs. Watts & Moore, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, Crew and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 8728.
    Tucker v. Hendricks.
    (Decided May 23, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Lucas county.

      Mr. Gilbert Harmon and Mr. S. D. Tucker, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. Skeffler & Campbell and Mr. J. E. Ladd, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, Crew and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 8732.
    Fahringer v. Babcock.
    (Decided May 23, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Henry county.

      Mr. James P. Bagan, for plaintiff in error.

      Mr. J. V. Cuff, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, Crew and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 8964.
    Kuhl, Exrx. v. Reichert et al.
    (Decided May 23, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Hamilton county.

      Mr. T. H. Darby, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. Renner & Renner, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Price and Summers, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 8695.
    The National Mercantile Co. et al. v. Brant.
    (Decided May 23, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Montgomery county.

      Messrs. Gottschall & Limbert, for plaintiffs in error.

      Mr. B. F. Hershey and Messrs. Craighead <& Craighead, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, Crew and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 8997.
    Scheid v. DuMont.
    (Decided May 23, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Putnam county.

      Mr. E. L. E. Mumma and Messrs. Bailey & Bailey., for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. Risser & Smith and Messrs. Watts & Moore, for defendant in error.
   Judgment vacated and cause remanded to circuit court with instructions to consider the bill of exceptions. 71 Ohio St., 295.

Davis, C. J., Price and Summers, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9011.
    Lawson et al. v. Lawson.
    (Decided May 23, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Columbiana county.

      Mr. Charles Boyd and Mr. J. G. Moore, for plaintiffs in error.

      Mr. I. A. Martin and Mr. P. M. Smith, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

. Davis, C. J., Price and Summers, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9027.
    The Cleveland & Parkersburg Oil Co. v. Patton et al.
    (Decided May 23, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Moiiroe county.

      Mr. F. A. Jeffers and Mr. Stanley Struble, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. Matz & Kremer, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Price and Summers, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9066.
    Cave v. State ex rel. Mowery.
    (Decided May 23, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Richland county.

      Messrs. Kerr & LaDow, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. Douglass & Mengert, for defendant in error.
   Judgment reversed and original petition dismissed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Crew and Spear, .JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9070.
    Courtright v. Courtright
    (Decided May 23, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Franklin county.

      Mr. G. J. Marriott, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. Pugh & Pugh, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Price hnd Summers, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9080.
    Whitacre et al. v. Whitacre et al.
    (Decided May 23, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Wood county.

      Messrs. Baldwin & Harrington, for plaintiffs in error.

      Messrs. Beverstock & Donahey, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, Crew, and Summers, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9093.
    Young v. Bowron et al.
    (Decided May 23, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Guernsey county.

      Mr. Fred L. Rosemond and Mr. Chas. S. Turnbaugh, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. McGinnis & Morris, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, Price, Crew and Summers, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9102.
    Van Kirk v. Miller.
    (Decided May 23, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Tuscarawas county.

      Mr. E. S. Souers, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. Bailey & Douthitt, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck> Price, Crew and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9106.
    Lawson v. Wells et al.
    (Decided May 23, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Columbiana county.

      Mr. A. G. Smith; Messrs. Smith & Lones, and Mr. G. W. Adams, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. Wells & McDonald, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price, Crew, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9139.
    The Ohio Oil Co. v. Sterling.
    (Decided May 23, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Wood county.

      Mr. James O. Troup, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. James & Powell and Mr. Edward Beverstock, for defendant in error.
   Judgment reversed. Grounds stated in journal entry.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Crew and Summers, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9275.
    Welever v. Williams et al.
    (Decided May 23, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Lucas county.

      Mr. Orville S. Brumback, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. Smith & Baker, for defendants in error.
   Judgment reversed. Grounds stated in journal entry.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9319.
    Lawson et al. v. Lawson.
    (Decided May 23, 1905.)
    .Error to Circuit court of Columbiana county.

      Mr. Chas. Boyd and Mr. J. G. Moore, for plaintiffs in error.

      Mr. J. A. Martin and Messrs. Smith dk Bones, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Price and Summers, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9444
    Swander v. Burger.
    (Decided May 23, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Seneca county.

      Mr. Alexander Kiskadden and Mr. N. W. Miller, for plaintiff in error.

      Mr. H. P. Black and Mr. Charles E. Derr, for defendant in error.
   Judgment vacated by agreement of parties and cause remanded to the circuit court with instructions to consider the bill of exceptions.


text:
    No. 8650.
    Horstman et al. v. The City of Cincinnati.
    (Decided May 31, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Hamilton county,

      Messrs. Bromwell & Bruce; Messrs. Goebel & Bettinger; Mr. E. R. Donohue; Messrs. Jones & James; Messrs. Galvin & Bauer; Mr. Jerome D.

      Creed; Mr. A. E. Painter and Messrs. Horstman & Kattenhorn, for plaintiffs in error.

      Mr. Charles J. Hunt and Mr. Frank H. Kunkel, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, Crew, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur.

Davis, C. J., not sitting.


text:
    No. 8653.
    The City of Cincinnati et al. v. Uhrlaub.
    (Decided May 31, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Hamilton county.

      Mr. Charles J. Hunt; Mr. Charles W. Scott and Mr. Albert H. Morrill, for plaintiffs in error.

      Messrs. Kramer & Kramer, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, Price, Crew and Spear, JJ., concur.

Davis, C. J., not sitting.


text:
    No. 8759.
    Chamber of Commerce Building Co. v. Klussman.
    (Decided May 31, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Lucas county.

      Mr. John F. Kumler and Messrs. Hamilton & Kirby, for plaintiff in error.

      Mr. George F. Wells and Mr. E. L. Twing, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Price, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9010.
    Cahill v. Eaton et al.
    (Decided May 31, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Crawford county.

      Mr. L. C. Feighner, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. Finley & Gallinger; Mr. A. Wickham and Mr. D. C. Cahill, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9015.
    Davis et al., Trustees, etc. v. State ex rel. Ferndon.
    (Decided May 31, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Lake county.

      Mr. Homer Harper and Mr. A. C. Pepoon, for plaintiffs in error.

      Messrs. Bosworth & Hammar and Mr. Elbert F. Blakely, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Price, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9119.
    Van Deman v. Pugh.
    (Decided May 31, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Jackson county.

      Mr. E. G. Powell and Messrs. Van Deman, Burkhart & Shea, for plaintiff in error.

      Mr. R. U. Wilson, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price, Crew and Summers, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 8734.
    Copper v. The City of Mt. Vernon.
    (Decided June 6, 1905.)
    ' Error to Circuit Court of Knox county.

      Mr. W. M. Koons, for plaintiff in error.

      Mr. J. B. Graham, for defendant in error.
   Judgment reversed because judgment does not show a finding of guilty. Validity of ordinance not passed upon.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Crew, Price and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 8747.
    The Cincinnati Stamping Co. v. Langhorst et al.
    (Decided June 6, 1905.)
    Error to Superior Court of Cincinnati.

      Messrs. Harmon, Colston, Goldsmith & Hoadly and Messrs. Gordon, Granger & DeWitt, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. Worthington & Strong, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, Crew and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 8975.
    The People’s Railway Co. v. McLean.
    (Decided June 6, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Montgomery county.

      Messrs. McMahon & McMahon, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. Jones & Stauter and Mr. L. D. Heller, for defendant in error.
   Judgment reversed. Ground stated in journal entry.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price and Crew, JJ., concur.

Summers, J., not sitting.


text:
    No. 9013.
    Hedding v. Quarry.
    (Decided June 6, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Morrow county.

      Mr. L. K. Powell, for plaintiff in error.

      Mr. Benjamin Olds and Mr. C. J. Fitzgerald, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price, Crew and Summers, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9033.
    Reidel et al. v. Ranker.
    (Decided June 6, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Crawford county.

      Messrs. Finley & Gallinger, for plaintiffs in error.

      Mr. L. C. Feighner, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, Crew and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9050.
    The Kenton Gas & Electric Co. v. Pfeiffer.
    (Decided June 6, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Hardin county.

      Messrs. Smick & Hoge and Mr. F. C. Dougherty, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. Stillings & Stillings and Mr. P. M. Crow, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, Price, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9064.
    Quallich v. Quallich.
    (Decided June 6, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Cuyahoga county.

      Messrs. Hart, Canfield & Croke, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. Meyer & Mooney, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price, Crew and Summers, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9081.
    Baker v. Baker et al.
    (Decided June 6, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Hamilton county.

      Messrs. Stephens, Lincoln & Stephens, for plaintiff in error.

      Mr. J. C. Clore and Mr. O. M. Rogers, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Price and Summers, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9099.
    Gilligan v. The Supreme Council Royal Arcanum.
    (Decided June 6, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Hamilton county.

      Mr. H. Douglass and Mr. G. W. Harding, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. Cobb, Howard & Bailey and Mr. R. C. Pugh, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price, Crew and Summers, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9107.
    Whitman v. Brush.
    (Decided June 6, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Franklin county.

      Mr. E. C. Turner, for plaintiff in error.

      Mr. C. T. Clark, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Si-iauck, Price, Crew and Summers, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9109.
    Keiter v. Loyd et al.
    (Decided June 6, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of G-reene county.

      Mr. Horace Sabin and Mr. Charles L. Spencer, for plaintiff in error.

      Mr. T. L. Magruder and Mr. C. H. Kyle, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price, Crew and Summers, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9120.
    Dowagiac Manufacturing Co. v. Judy.
    (Decided June 6, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Darke county.

      Messrs. Teagarden & Harrison, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. Robeson & Yount, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, Crew and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9123.
    The Tippecanoe Coal Co. v. Minteer, Admr.
    (Decided June 6, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Harrison county.

      Mr. D. A. Hollingsworth, for plaintiff in error.

      Mr. R. H. Minteer and Mr. T. H. Loller, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Price, Crew and Summers. JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9124.
    Coons v. Reigel, Exr.
    (Decided June 6, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Hancock county.

      Messrs. Axline & Betts, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. Poe & Poe, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Price and Summers, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9125.
    The Toledo & Ohio Central Railway Co. v. Miller et al.
    (Decided June 6, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Delaware county.

      Messrs. Bargar & Bargar and Mr. B. W. Hough. for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. Marriott, Freshwater & Wickham, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Price and Summers JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9128.
    The Brightman Mfg. Co. et al. v. Trustees of Hardy Township.
    (Decided June 6, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Holmes county.

      Mr. W. Stilwell, for plaintiffs in error.

      Messrs. Stilwell & Bailey and Messrs. Reid & Hanna, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, Crew and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9138.
    Franklin v. The Cincinnati, Hamilton & Dayton Railway Co.
    (Decided June 6, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Allen county.

      Messrs. Ridenour & Halfhill, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. Marshall, Longsworth & Marshall, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, Crew and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9147.
    The City of Bowling Green v. Sutton.
    (Decided June 6, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Wood county.

      Mr. P. J. Chase and Mr. J. O. Troup, for plaintiff in error.

      Mr. J. W. Grabiel, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Price and Summers, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9496.
    The Village of Grover Hill v. McClure.
    (Decided June 6, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Paulding county.

      Messrs. Snook & Wilcox, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. Snook & Savage and Mr. T. E. Parks, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Price and Summers, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9497.
    The Village of Grover Hill v. Eaton.
    (Decided June 6, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Paulding county.

      Messrs. Snook & Wilcox, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. Snook & Savage, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Price and Summers, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 8748.
    Union Fraternal League v. Dawe.
    (Decided June 13, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Cuyahoga county.

      Mr. J. F. Wilson, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. Brady & Cashman, for defendant in error.
   Judgment reversed. Ground stated in journal entry.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Crew and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 8796.
    Gibson v. Gibson.
    (Decided June 13, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Hamilton county.

      Mr. L. Maxwell, Jr.; Mr. C. P. Brown and Mr. J. S. . Graydon, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. Paxton & Warrington and Mr. T. B. Paxton, Jr., for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, Crew and Summers, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9028.
    Heintz et al. v. Trader et al.
    (Decided June 13, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Hamilton county.

      Mr. C. W. Baker and Messrs. Outcalt & Foraker, for plaintiffs in error.

      Mr. P. M. Pogue and Mr. W. A. DeCamp, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price, Crew, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9029.
    Heintz et al. v. Sawyer et al.
    (Decided June 13, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Hamilton county.

      Mr. C. W. Baker and Messrs. Outcalt & Foraker, for plaintiffs in error.

      Mr. P. M. Pogue and Mr. W. A. DeCamp, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price, Crew, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9030.
    Immons v. The State of Ohio.
    (Decided June 13, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Williams county.

      Mr. C. L. Newcomer, for plaintiff in error.

      Mr. E. Gaudern, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Price and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9118.
    Maholm et al. v. Elliott.
    (Decided June 13, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Licking county.

      Mr. O. W. Aldrich, for plaintiffs in error.

      Mr. W. P. Elliott and Mr. Jonathan Rees, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Price and Summers, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9129.
    Scheu, Exr. v. Connecticut Fire Insurance Co.
    (Decided June 13, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Tuscarawas county.

      Mr. J. A. Hostetler and Messrs. Richards & McCullough, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. Neely & Patrick and Mr. J. W. Mooney, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price, Crew, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9133.
    The State ex rel. Fidelity & Deposit Co. v. Vorys, Insurance Commissioner.
    (Decided June 13, 1905.)
    Mandamus.

      Messrs. Daugherty & Todd, for plaintiff in error.

      Mr. Wade H. Ellis, for defendant in error.
   Demurrer to petition sustained and petition dismissed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price, Crew and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9142.
    Bolles v. The Dowagiac Mfg. Co.
    (Decided June 13, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Fulton county. ,

      Messrs. Sheets, Files & Paxson, for plaintiff in error.

      Mr. U. G. Hahn; Messrs. Handy & Wolf and Coy W. Hendryx, for defendant in error.
   Judgment reversed and judgment of the court of common pleas affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Crew and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9144.
    The Herbrand Co. v. Dickson.
    (Decided June 13, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Sandusky county.

      Messrs. Bartlett & Wilson, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. Meek, Dudrow & Worst and Messrs. Finch & Dewey, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price, Crew, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9145.
    Ream v. Commissioners of Putnam and Paulding Counties et al.
    (Decided June 13, 1905.)
    Error 4o Circuit Court of Putnam county.

      Mr. J. S. Ogan, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. Risser & Smith and Mr. G. W. Risser, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, Crew and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9150.
    Sink v. The C., C., C. & St. L. Railway Co.
    (Decided June 13, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Darke county.

      Mr. A. A. North and Mr. W. Y. Stubbs, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. Clark & Clark, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price, Crew, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9152.
    Cain v. The Dayton & Northern Traction Co.
    (Decided June 13, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Darke county.

      Mr. A. A. North and Mr. W. Y. Stubbs, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. Anderson, Bowman & Anderson, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price, Crew and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9269.
    The Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Ry. Co. v. Downing.
    (Decided June 13, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Lucas county.

      Messrs. Potter & Potter; Mr. G. C. Greene and Mr. F. J. Jerome, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. Marshall & Fraser and Mr. W. G. Ulery, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, Price, Crew and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 8753.
    Boone v. The City of Cincinnati.
    (Decided June 20, 1905.)
    Error to Superior Court of Cincinnati.

      Mr. Theo. Horstman and Mr. G. H. Kattenhorn, for plaintiff in error.

      Mr. C. W. Scott and Mr. C. J. Hunt, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, Price and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 8771.
    Trimble et al. v. May.
    (Decided June 20, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Columbiana county.

      Mr. S. W. Ramsey, for plaintiffs in error.

      Mr. C. S. Speaker and Mr. G. T. Ferrell, for defendant in error.
   Judgment reversed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 8773.
    Dickinson v. Sevall.
    (Decided June 20, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Muskingum county.

      Mr. S. M. Winn and Mr. J. C. Bassett, Jr., for plaintiff in error.

      Mr. T. J. McDermott; Mr. J. J. Adams and Mr. P. H. Tannehill, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, Crew and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 8780.
    Slatmyer et al. v. Springborn et al.
    (Decided June 20, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Cuyahoga county.

      Messrs. Goulder, Holding & Masten, for plaintiffs in error.

      Mr. N. D. Baker, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Price, Crew and Summers, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 8790.
    Malcomsom v. Armstrong, as Central Coal Co.
    (Decided June 20, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Jackson county.

      Mr. E. C. Powell, for plaintiff in error.

      Mr. T. S. Hogan; Mr. John Harper and Mr. Daniel Armstrong, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, Crew and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 8923.
    Holcomb, Trustee, v. Willis, Admr., et al.
    (Decided June 20, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Fayette county.

      Mr. John Logan and Mr. W. C. Tanzey, for plaintiff in error.

      Mr. H. B. Jones; Messrs. Harper & Harper and Mr. W. C. Tanzey, for defendants in error.
   Judgment reversed and remanded on authority of Jones v. Willis, Admr., 72 Ohio St., 189.

Davis, C. J., Price, Crew and Spear, JJ., concur. Summers, J., not sitting.


text:
    No. 9108.
    Whitman v. Carter.
    (Decided June 20, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Franklin county.

      Mr. E. C. Turner, for plaintiff in error.

      Mr. C. T. Clark, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, Crew and Spear, J J., concur.


text:
    No. 9153.
    Corbin et al. v. Hafer.
    (Decided June 20, 1905.)
    Error to Superior Court of Cincinnati.

      Mr. C. W. Baker, for plaintiffs in error.

      Mr. C. B. Wilby, for defendant in error.
   Judgment of the general term reversed and that of the special term affirmed on authority of Moore v. Harter, 67 Ohio St., 250.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price and Crew, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9163.
    Dunlap v. Dunlap.
    (Decided June 20, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Eoss county.

      Mr. J. C. Entrekin and Mr. W. G. Hyde, for plaintiff in error.

      Mr. J. W. Goldsberry, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C! J., Shauck, Price, Crew, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9167.
    Chaney et al. v. Fry et al.
    (Decided June 20, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Coshocton county.

      Mr. J. M. Swartz and Mr. J. Chaney, for plaintiffs in error.

      Mr. C. B. Hunt; Mr. F. A. Durban and Mr. A. E. Wright, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price, Crew, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9171.
    Eltzroth, Guardian, v. Whitacre.
    (Decided June 20, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Warren county.

      Messrs. Eltzroth & Maple, for plaintiff in error.

      Mr. William McDonald, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price, Crew, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9172.
    The Peabody Buggy Co. v. McLaughlin.
    (Decided June 20, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Seneca county.

      Messrs. McCauley & Weller, for plaintiff in error.

      Mr. C. A. Strauch, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price, Crew, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9173.
    Dhonau et al. v. Striebinger et al.
    (Decided June 20, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Cuyahoga county.

      Mr. A. Mendelson and Messrs. McKemy & Belville, for plaintiffs in error.

      Mr. E. H. Wilcox and Mr. F. G. Friend, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9178.
    Baum v. The Fire Clay Co.
    (Decided June 20, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Tuscarawas county.

      Mr. E. C. Seikel and Mr. P. S. Olmstead, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. Hostetler & Hostetler, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9240.
    The Mahoning Valley Railway Co. v. Bianco.
    (Decided June 20, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Trumbull county.

      Messrs. Arrel, McVey & Tayler and Messrs. Rowland & Harrington, for plaintiff in error.

      Mr. T. McNamara, Jr., and Mr. C. Fillius, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Crew, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9254.
    Coursen v. Hess, Exr.
    (Decided June 20, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Richland county.

      Mr. G. H. Workman and Mr. F. V. Owen, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. Kerr & La Dow, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9272.
    Hooper v. The Emma Coal Co.
    (Decided June 20, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Jackson county.

      Mr. E. C. Powell, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. McGillivray & Armstrong, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price, Summers and Spear, JJ., eoncur.


text:
    No. 8712.
    The C., C., C. & St. L. Railway Co. v. Tehan, a Minor.
    (Decided June 27, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Logan county.

      Messrs. West & West, for plaintiff in error.

      Mr. J. A. Price and Mr. T. M. Shea, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, Price, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9180.
    Hale v. Hale et al.
    (Decided June 27, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Hancock county.

      Mr. C. A. Strauch and Messrs. Ross & Kinder, for plaintiff in error.

      Mr. J. P. Mourer; Messrs. J. A. & E. V. Bope and Mr. T. P. Johnston, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davís, C. J., Shauck, Price, Crew, Summers and Spear,-JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9189.
    The Pullman Co. v. Willett.
    (Decided June 27, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Bicliland county.

      Messrs. Cummings, McBride & Wolfe, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. Kerr & La Dow, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9190.
    Hedding v. Hedding.
    (Decided June 27, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Morrow county.

      Mr. B. Olds and Mr. C. J. Fitzgerald, for plaintiff in error.

      Mr. L. K. Powell, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price, Crew and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9192.
    The City of Toledo et al. v. Baumann et al.
    (Decided June 27, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Lucas county.
    . Mr. U. G. Denman and Mr. F. G. Crane, for plaintiffs in error.

      Mr. Johnson Thurston; Mr. H. A. Merrill and Mr. C. F. Watts, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Price, Crew, Summers and Speak, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9273.
    State ex rel. Commissioners of Knox County v. The C., A. & C. Railway Co.
    (Decided June 27, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Knox county.

      Mr. W. M. Koons, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. Waight & Moore, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, Price, Crew and Summers, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 8581.
    Kirk et al., Exrs. v. White.
    (Decided June 30, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Knox county.

      Messrs. Kelley & Follett; Messrs. McIntire & McIntire; Messrs. Waight & Moore and Mr. J. W. Warrington, for plaintiffs in error.

      Mr. L. B. Houck and Mr. F. V. Owen, for defendant in error.
   Former judgment adhered to.

Shauck, Crew and Summers, JJ., concur.

Price, J., not sitting.


text:
    No. 8808.
    Morse et al. v. Lippert.
    (Decided June 30, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Allen county.

      Messrs. Cable & Parmenter, for plaintiffs in error.

      Mr. B. C. Starr and Messrs. Motter, Mackenzie & Weadock, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Price, Crew, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9194.
    Hedges v. Miller, Admr.
    (Decided June 30, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Richland county.

      Messrs. Cummings, McBride & Wolfe, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. Kerr & La Dow, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price, Crew, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9197.
    The National Supply Co. v. Kelley et al.
    (Decided June 30, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Hancock county.

      Messrs. Taber & Clapp, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. Axline & Betts, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price, Crew and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9203.
    Johnson et al. v. Anderson, Treasurer
    (Decided June 30, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Delaware county.

      Messrs. Overturf & Hough and Mr. G. W. Carpenter, for plaintiffs in error.

      Mr. E. T. Humes and Messrs. Marriott, Freshwater & Wickham, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price, Crew, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9204
    DeWitt, Receiver, v. The Moemke & Alf. Co. et al.
    (Decided June 30, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Hamilton county.

      Mr. J. C. Healy, for plaintiff in error.

      Mr. T. M. Hinkle and Mr. F. W. Hinkle, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price, Crew and Summers, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9206.
    DuBois v. Lane et al.
    (Decided June 30, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Preble county.

      Mr. W. C. Thompson; Mr. D. H. Pfoutz and Mr. E. P. Vaughan, for plaintiff in error.
    ' Messrs. Risinger & Risinger; Mr. J. L. Sayler; Mr. C. B. Dechant and Mr. L. K. Langdon, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price, Crew and Summers, JJ.,'concur.


text:
    No. 9209.
    Locke v. The Village of El Dorado.
    (Decided June 30, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Preble county.

      Messrs. J. A. & C. R. Gilmore; Messrs. King, Lowry & King and Mr. E. P. Vaughan, for plaintiff in error.

      Messrs. Risinger & Risinger, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price, Crew and Summers, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9213.
    Bright et al. v. Lincoln et al.
    (Decided June 30, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Wood county.

      Mr. G. F. Pendleton; Mr. J. E. Priddy and Messrs. Phelps & David, for plaintiffs in error.

      Messrs. Fries & Painter and Messrs. Baldwin & Harrington, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed

Davis, C. J., Shauck Price, Crew and Summers, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9376.
    Davies, Auditor, et al. v. Botefuhr.
    (Decided June 30, 1905.)
    Error to Circuit Court of Lucas county.

      Mr. W. G. Ulery and Mr. J. S. Martin, for plaintiffs in error.

      Mr. B. A. Hayes, for defendant in error.
   Judgment reversed and original petition dismissed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck, Price and Summers, JJ., concur.


author: Spear, J.

text:
    The Cincinnati Traction Company v. Forrest.

      Court should confine matter of its charge — To issues in the pleads ■ings — Suit to recover for personal injuries in alighting from street car — Jury misled 6y charge.

    1. The rule that the court ought to adapt its charge to the issues made by the pleadings and the evidence, forbids the introduction into the charge of instructions upon an issue not so raised.
    2. Where in a suit to recover for personal injuries occasioned by the alleged negligence of the defendant, the petition, after stating the facts upon which the plaintiff bases his action, avers that the plaintiff was free from fault and the answer ■is a general denial, there is no issue of contributory negligence, and where, in such case, the testimony introduced by the plaintiff does not tend to show contributory negligence, it is error for the court to introduce the element of contributory negligence in its charge to the' jury and give instructions thereon. And where it is apparent that the jury may have been misled by such charge to the prejudice of the defeated party, the judgment will be reversed and a new trial awarded.
    (No. 9365
    Decided October 31, 1905.)
    Error to the Superior Court of Cincinnati.
    The original action was brought by the defendant in error, Nellie Forrest, against the Traction Company, to recover for personal injuries by reason of alleged negligence of the Company. A verdict was rendered in her favor and judgment thereon entered. This judgment was affirmed by the superior court in general term and the Company brings error.

      Mr. Joseph Wilby, attorney for plaintiff in error,
    cited and commented upon the following authorities:

      Patterson v. Railway Co., 49 N. Y. Supp., 296; Neff v. Traction Co., 192 Pa. St., 501; Simmons v. Green, 35 Ohio St., 104; Corry v. Campbell, 25 Ohio St., 134; Bliss on Code Pleading (2 ed.), sec. 327; Hoffman v. Gordon, 15 Ohio St., 211; Gilbert v. Cram, 12 How. Pr., 455; McNutt v. Kaufman, 26 Ohio St., 127; Street Railway v. Stallmann, 22 Ohio St., 1.

      Mr. Charles W. Baker, attorney for .defendant in error,
    cited and commented upon the following authorities:

      Coffman, Admr. v. Finney, Admr., et ad., 65 Ohio St., 69; Strong v. Hardware Co., 6 Circ. Dec., 212; 9 C. C. R., 249; Railway Co. v. Hart, 6 Circ. Dec., 731; 10 C. C. R., 411; Street Railway Co. v. Nolthenius, 40 Ohio St., 376; Rapid Transit Co. v. Holmes, 67 Ohio St., 155; Railroad Co. v. Whitacre, 35 Ohio St., 627; Robison v. Gray, 28 Ohio St., 241; Toledo v. Nitz, 13 Circ. Dec., 350; sec. 6710, Rev. Stat.
   Spear, J.

In her petition the plaintiff, as cause of action, alleged that she was a passenger on a street car on the track of the Company’s line in Cincinnati ; that desiring to alight at the corner of Find-lay and Vine streets, she signalled the conductor to" stop at that point; that, in response to said signal, thereupon the car did stop at that point; that she started to alight from the car, when, just as she was about to step from the running board on to the ground, the conductor negligently and before she was able to alight from the car signalled the car to go on, and thereupon the motorman started the car, all before plaintiff was able to alight from the same to the ground and while she was in the act of so alighting; and thereupon the ear so suddenly starting threw plaintiff to the ground before she was able to alight from the same, all without fault and negligence upon her part, and wholly by reason of the negligence of the conductor and motorman, who were in charge of the operation of the car and operating the same for the defendant Company. She was violently thrown upon the ground and badly injured and bruised; that her left arm was broken,.and that she suffered great pain and injury therefrom, and loss of time.

The answer of the Company admitted the allegation that it is a corporation organized under the laws of Ohio, and, excepting this, denied each and every allegation in the petition contained.

Testimony was given by plaintiff at the trial tending to support her claim as made in the petition, and by defendant tending to disprove her claim by showing that if she were the person who met with an accident at the time and place stated it did not' 4occur in the manner alleged in the petition, but did occur by reason of the plaintiff undertaking to alight before the car had come to a stop, and while it was still in motion, and that was the sole cause of her injury.

The issue thus made was a simple one. Did the accident happen by reason of the negligent starting of the car while the plaintiff was in the act of alighting from it? If it did then she was entitled to recover. If it did not she was not. It is true that the petition contained an averment that the accident occurred without fault or negligence on the part of the plaintiff and that this was denied by a general denial, but such denial was not the equivalent of an allegation of contributory negligence because the entire incident itself as pleaded was denied. The element of contributory negligence could not, in the nature of things, become a feature of an event which did not occur at all. From this it follows that there was no issue in the pleadings respecting contributory negligence. Nor was such issue raised by the evidence. The plaintiff’s testimony was in direct support of her cause of action as stated in the petition, and no fact tending to show negligence on her part appeared, so that there was nothing of that character to be rebutted. If the jury believed the plaintiff’s evidence a recovery was inevitable; if it disbelieved her she was not entitled to recover; not because of contributory negligence, but because she had failed to sustain the cause of action made in her petition.

In this condition of the pleadings and proof the trial court charged the jury, in a charge otherwise properly covering the case, that if the jury should find that upon her own motion the plaintiff stepped off the car while it was moving so fast as to render the act dangerous, the plaintiff was not in the exercise of ordinary care and contributing thus to the injury, cannot recover. And, in another part of the charge, that to entitle the plaintiff to recover she must not only have made it appear that she was not at fault, that is, that at the time of the injury she was in the exercise of ordinary care, but she must also have satisfied the jury that the proximate cause of the injury was the negligent act of the employes of the Company, and further on, there was again introduced the element of contributory negligence by a statement that if the accident happened while the plaintiff was alighting from the car and before she had a reasonable opportunity for leaving the car in safety, without fault on her part, then if the injury happened because of the negligence of defendant’s employes, she could recover.

Contributory negligence on the part of a plaintiff implies negligence on the part of the other party; it cannot exist without. It is the want of ordinary care by a person injured by the negligence of another, concurring with such negligence, and thus contributing to the injury as a proximate cause. See 7 Am. & Eng. Ency. Law, 371; Montgomery Gas Light Co. v. Railway Co., 86 Ala., 372; Hookler v. Willamette Railway Co., 18 Ore., 189; Southern Bell Tel. Co. v. Watts, 66 Fed. Rep., 460. The plaintiff’s negligence may be the sole proximate cause of the injury, but it is not in such case contributory negligence, because to contribute is to have a share in some act or effect, to lend assistance or aid. Hence if no act occurs to be aided there can be no act which is contributory.

Taken all together it is apparent, as it 'seems to us, that the jury may have inferred from the charge that if the plaintiff instead.of having received her injuries by alighting from a car which had at her request stopped and had been negligently started, had in fact undertaken to alight while the car was still in motion, and yet in doing so had exercised ordinary care, she might recover. In so charging we think the learned trial court erred to the prejudice of the defendant. It was entitled to have the real issue presented to the jury without qualification or complication. The sympathy of jurors is apt to be, and naturally so, with the injured person,' especially if such person be a woman. This fact makes it all the more the duty of the courts to give the simple law of the case as presented by the pleadings and the evidence, so that both parties may have equal opportunity before the law.

Attention is called to that part of the record in which the defendant’s counsel after the charge was given, requested the court to charge more specifically respecting the matter of contributory negligence as though this action in some way estopped counsel to complain of the charge in that respect. We think it does not have that effect. The counsel could not help what the court had already said on that subject, and the court declined to further charge upon it.

■ It is urged, also, that there is in the record no sufficient exception by the .defendant to the charge. It is true that the desire to except is not stated in the usual way, but we think the purpose is sufficiently expressed and that both court and counsel so understood it at the time.

The judgment will be reversed and the cause remanded for further proceedings according to law.

Reversed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck and. Summers, JJ., concur.


author: Summers, J.

text:
    McNeal, Exr. v. Pierce, Admr.

      Legacy of sum for care of son — Does not imply debt, when— Pleaded in action, barred by limitation, when — Effect of death of legatee before testator — Interpretation of wills — Statute of limitations.

    1. A legacy reciting that it is “in consideration of her care for my invalid mother many years preceding her death, and also her care of my infant son” does not imply a debt but a bounty. It is not an acknowledgment of a legal obligation and when pleaded in an action, barred by the statute of limitations, to recover for such services, does not remove the bar of the statute.
    2. A legacy given in payment of a debt, by the express terms of the will, does not lapse by the death of the legatee before the testator, but when by the terms of the will it appears that the intention of the testator was to confer a bounty it is not competent to show a different intent and to prevent a lapse by proof that the -legacy was given in payment of a debt. ,
    (No. 9235
    Decided October 31, 1905.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Marion county.
    The tenth item of the will of William P. Hazen, executed in 1896, is as follows: ‘ ‘ Tenth. I give and bequeath to my niece, Miss Mary Pierce, daughter of my sister, Emily Pierce, of Middlefield, Geauga county, Ohio, $5,000.00, the same being in consideration of her care of my invalid mother many years preceding her death, and also her care of my infant son, Martin L. Hazen, after the death of his mother. ’ ’
    The legatee died without issue in the lifetime of the testator. Suit was brought by the administrator of the legatee against the executor to recover the. amount of the legacy. It is averred in the petition that in 1858 the testator was indebted to the legatee for services then and theretofore rendered by her at his request in the care of his invalid mother and of his infant son, which were of the value of $5,000.00.
    The tenth item of the will is then set out as an acknowledgment of the debt in writing and signed by the párty to be charged to remove the bar of the-statute of limitations. The court of common pleas sustained a general demurrer to the petition. The circuit court reversed.

      Messrs. J. F. McNeal and L. B. McNeal, attorneys, for plaintiff in error.
    1. The facts pleaded do not show a written acknowledgment of a debt.
    This is true, because:

      (a) The acknowledgment relied on and pleaded is a legacy, a bequest, a gift, and not an acknowledgment of a debt or a promise to pay a debt.

    The definition of the word “legacy” should be sufficient to sustain our proposition: “A legacy is a bequest, or gift, of goods and chattels- by will or testament.” Orton v. Orton, 3 Key. (N. Y.), 488;. 2 Williams’ Executors, 947; 5 T. R., 716; 1 Burr., 268; 7 Ves., 391; 2 Bouv. Dic., 20.
    • (b) The language used is insufficient to constitute an acknowledgment.

    The acknowledgment must be clear and explicit in admitting that there is an indebtedness, the particular debt, and that it is due and unpaid. We cite a few authorities as to the elements necessary in an acknowledgment of a barred debt: Webster v. Newbold, 82 Am. Dec., 487 (41 Pa. St., 482); McCormick v. Brown, 95 Am. Dec., 170 (36 Cal., 180); Harlan v. Bernie, 76 Am. Dec., 428 (22 Ark., 219). Among the very late cases are the following: Manchester v. Braedner, 1 Am. St., 829 (107 N. Y., 346); Macrum
      v. Marshall, 14 Am. St., 730 (129 Pa. St., 506); Ward v. Jack, 51 Am. St., 744 (172 Pa. St., 416); see also note, 24 Am. St., 496.
    2. No recovery can be had of the legacy, as a legacy, because it lapsed. In Ohio, legacies lapse under statutory provision therefor (sec. 5971, Rev. Stat.), and not under the rules of common Icm.

    The foregoing is the fiat, judgment, decree of the legislature on the subject of the lapse of legacies, and the fact that certain pecuniary legacies did not lapse, under the rules of the common law, can not change the same in the smallest degree.
    If the legislature intended there should be exceptions, other than that provided for, to the application of its rule as to the lapsing of legacies, it would have provided for the exceptions. The case at bar not falling within the exception, it can not well be made an exception by a court. Earnfit v. Winans, 3 Ohio, 135.

      Mr. N. H. Bostwick and Messrs. Grissinger & Guthery, attorneys for defendants in error.

      First. We think, on the facts stated, we can, recover on the claim for services performed.

      Second. On the facts stated we can recover the $5,000.00 as a legacy. The recovery on one state of facts will, of course, be a bar to a recovery on the other.
    We will consider first our right to recover for services performed.
    For the care and support of his infant child, Wm. P. Hazen was legally bound to pay, whether he contracted to do so or not the law puts that burden upon him, and if Mary Pierce cared for his child, and especially if she did it at his request and on his promise to pay therefor, he is legally hound to pay for the same what it is worth. The fact that she rendered the service raises the implied obligation to pay. Linn v. Ross, 10 Ohio, 412; Harrison v. Gotleib, 2 Circ. Dec., 109; 3 C. C. R., 191; Dunn v. Dunn, 10 Dec. Re., 765; 23 W. L. B., 328; 1 Beach on Contracts, sec. 650; 17 Am. & Eng. Ency. Law, 348, 351; Allen v. Collins, 35 Am. Rep., 419; Bachman v. Roller, 40 Am. Rep., 97; DeFreest v. Warner, 50 Am. Rep., 657.
    A.nd if he fixes the prices himself, that he is to pay, after the lapse of many years or at his death, who has a right to dispute it, or claim they were not then of the value he placed upon them? I think no one will seriously deny that the petition states facts sufficient to show that Vm. P. Hazen was indebted to Mary Pierce, and that the debt was never paid.
    Now, has the administrator a right to recover the amount of that indebtedness?
    The defendant says no, because the petition shows his right of action is barred by the statute of limitations. The statute of limitations on which he .relies is section 4979, Revised Statutes.
    But say Mary Pierce’s right of action did accrue at the time she rendered the services and by lapse of time had become barred. Revised Statutes, section 4992, provides that:

      First. When payment has been made upon a,ny demand founded on contract.

      Second. Or a written acknowledgment therefor.

      Third. Or promise to pay the same has been made and signed by the party to he charged; an action may be brought thereon within the time herein limited after such payment, acknowledgment or promise.

      Under the above section an action may be brought on the original demand by averring the acknowledgment. Coffin v. Secor, 40 Ohio St., 637.
    And there is no doubt but that we have a right of action on the new promise to pay, founded upon the original consideration. Haymaker v. Haymaker, 4 Ohio St., 272.

      There can be no doubt that Wm. P. Hazen intended this acknowledgment of his indebtedness to Mary Pierce that he so solemnly made in his will should be communicated to Mary Pierce; it was pat there in the ivill for that picrpose.

    An acknowledgment 'made to a stranger, in the absence of the plaintiff, will take a demand out of the statute. Woodbridge v. Allen, 12 Metc., 470.
    To take a demand out of the statute of limitations, direct and positive proof of an acknowledgment or new promise in any set form of words is not required, but they may be inferred from facts without words. Whitney v. Bigelow, 4 Pick., 110.
    Where debts are barred by the statute of limitations a specific provision in the will for their payment would seem to have the effect to revive them, and make them payable by the executor, notwithstanding the creditor might decease before the testator. 2 Redfield on Law of Wills, 161; Page on Wills, sec. 797; Jackson’s Succession, 47 La., 1089. Under our code we do not have to elect in a law suit, but may set forth all the facts. Gartner v. Corwine, 57 Ohio St., 246.
    We have a right to recover the legacy in this action. The legacy became due in one year after the executor qualified. Section 6128, Rev. Stat., amended 93 O. L., 93; sec. 6211, Rev. Stat.; Page on Wills, sec. 803. Assets in hands of executor. Webster v. Bible

      Soc., 50 Ohio St., 1; Gray v. Case School, 62 Ohio St., 1.
    The legacy has not lapsed; at common law a legacy will lapse hy reason of the death of the beneficiary before the testator. But a legacy given in payment of a debt will not lapse because of the death of the legatee before the testator. 18 Am. & Eng. Ency. Law (2 ed.), 749 and note; Ward v. Bush, 45 Atl. Rep., 534. When a legacy was given upon a valuable consideration in payment of a debt of testator it did not lapse at common law. Page on Wills, sec. 739.
    If a barred demand is sufficient consideration to support a promise to pay, it is also a good consideration for a legacy. 2 Redfield on Law of Wills, 161.
    Our statute does not enlarge but modifies the common law doctrine of lapse. Page on Wills, sec. 742 ; sec. 5971, Rev. Stat.; Woolley v. Paxson, 46 Ohio St., 307.
    There can be no abatement of this legacy, and although we have alleged it, we do not have to prove that there are sufficient assets in hands of executor 'to pay it, for the legacy is in satisfaction of a debt. Page on Wills, sec. 776.
    There is no doubt but what there is a right of action on the new promise or acknowledgment, founded upon the original consideration. Hill v. Henry, 17 Ohio, 9.
   Summers, J.

Two questions are presented: first, whether the will removed the' bar of the statute of limitations, and, second, whether the legacy lapsed.

The claim for services is barred unless the will is an acknowledgment. The natural and ordinary meaning of the words “in consideration of” in the connection used is not compensation but a mark or token of affection or appreciation. The testator does not acknowledge that there ever was any liability, debt, or claim. He acknowledges merely the fact that his niece did care for his invalid mother and for his infant son, and feeling grateful therefor, in recognition or consideration of the fact, he gives her $5,000.00. The services may have been paid for or rendered gratuitously. He acknowledges a debt of gratitude, not a legal obligation, and he does not direct the payment of a debt but confers a bounty. In Duncan v. Franklin Township, 43 N. J. Eq., 143, where the item of the will under consideration read as follows: “I give and bequeath to Henry Benson Duncan, for his services in assisting me at different times, the sum of $2,000.00,” it is said in the opinion (145) “the expression ‘for his services in assisting me at different times,’ does not, standing alone, import an indebtedness from her to the legatee for which payment may be exacted by process of law.. For aught that appears to the contrary, the services may have been rendered gratuitously and the legacy may have been given in grateful recognition of that.”

The second question is whether the facts set out in the petition state a cause of action for the recovery of the legacy.

• It is conceded that the general rule is that a legacy lapses when the legatee dies before the testator and that section 5971, Revised Statutes, enacted to prevent mischief from the operation of the rule, does not apply; but it is contended that a legacy does not lapse when it is given to pay a debt, citing Ward v. Bush, 59 N. J. Eq., 144.

The cases that hold that a legacy given in payment of a debt does not lapse do so for the reason that such is the manifest intention of the testator. That is the ground of the decision in Williamson v. Naylor, 3 Younge & Coll., 208. There it is held that certain creditors, whose claims were barred but who were named in the will which provided that a certain part of the estate should be divided among them, should not be considered as legatees but rather as creditors and consequently that the representatives of such as died in the testator’s lifetime were entitled to the benefit of the will. In the note to that case, it appears that Lord Lyndhurst, C. B., in disposing of the matter when it was before him said: “I cannot consider this as a mere voluntary bounty on the part of the testator, but we must consider that the testator meant this money to be applied in satisfaction, or part satisfaction, of an obligation in reduction of his debts, which though they could not be enforced against him at law, were, nevertheless, subsisting debts.” * * * “In this case, the testator has manifested an anxious desire to fulfill his just obligations ; and it was plainly his intention not to make a gift to the persons named in the schedule but to waive the legal bar to the recovery of his debts.” In Philips v. Philips, 3 Hare, 281, where the testator gave the residue of his estate to trustees, upon trust, to divide the same among certain creditors, it is held that: “The shares attributed to the debts of creditors who uied in the lifetime of the testator do not lapse by their death.” Again, “that the testator must be considered as proceeding upon a mixed principle of bounty and obligation; that the will must be read as, to some extent, directing payment.of debts.” The vice chancellor says (292): “In coming to the conclusion that the representatives of the creditors who died in the testator’s lifetime are entitled to claim, I consider that I follow the case of Williamson v. Naylor, that I am giving effect to the trusts of the will, and that I am doing that which the conscience of the testator led him to do, in discharging pro tanto his obligations to his creditors, notwithstanding the bar of the statute. If that were his intention, which, on the face of the will, and on the authority of Williamson v. Naylor, I will assume, I cannot suppose that the testator contemplated the depriving of the benefit given by the will those creditors who might happen to die between the date of his will and his death.” Again (300), “Another observation strongly in favor of Williamson v. Naylor is this: if the claimants had been treated as legatees, and not as creditors, the rights of the creditors to the benefit of the trust might have lapsed by his death in the lifetime of the testator. This could not have been in accordance with the intention of the testator.”

In Turner v. Martin, 7 DeG. M. & G., 429, 432, the Lord Chancellor says: “The object of the testator was to do that which was honest and just, namely, to pay those creditors in full who had proved against the joint estate of his father and himself; that object could not have been attained if his intended bounty was to be limited to those creditors only who might happen to survive him, he having lived twenty-nine years after the debts were proved.”

In the present case the claim is barred. The testator does not acknowledge it. In law it is no debt and it cannot be said that the intention of the testator was to discharge an obligation and not to confer a bounty. The intention of the testator must be given effect according to what appears upon the face of the will. There is no ambiguity, and evidence to prove an intention different than that implied in the terms of the will would be incompetent. Comfort v. Mather, 2 W. & S., 450.

• The judgment of the circuit court is. reversed and that of the common pleas is affirmed.

Reversed.

Davis, C. J., Shauck and Crew, JJ., concur.