Volume 168 — Michigan Reports

<p>1. Railroads — Operation op Trains — Negligence op Dispatcher</p> <p>It was not negligence on the part of a train dispatcher to direct a regular train to proceed, after having informed a subordinate in charge of the local yard and the movement of trains, that the regular passenger train would not run over that portion of the line but would detour, where the train dispatcher had the right to expect, if any other train was permitted to proceed on the time of the passenger train, its crew would obey all rules and requirements of the company, which, if followed, would protect both trains.</p> <p>2. Same — Evidence—Rules.</p> <p>The meaning of printed or written rules and bulletins of a railroad corporation for the guidance of its employés is for the court unless some ambiguity is involved, and opinion evidence is not admissible to show their meaning.</p> <p>3. Same — Locomotives—Trains—Words and Phrases.</p> <p>Under provisions of defendant’s rules that the word train should be understood to apply to an engine or more than one engine coupled, with or without cars, etc., a freight engine and its tender were included in a rule forbidding north-bound trains to use the south-bound track of a double-track system.</p> <p>4. Same — Violations op Rules — Notice.</p> <p>A rule forbidding north-bound trains to use the south-bound track was not shown to have been changed by a custom to use the track inconsistently with such rule, under evidence that yard engines used both tracks in either direction, under the direction of a yardmaster, but not on the time of regular trains, and under special precautions for protecting them, or that a dummy train was permitted by authority to use the south-bound track in running north, or that passenger and freight engines took the left track to go to the roundhouse; defendant employing a man to see the rules were obeyed, so far as possible, and keeping the rules and bulletins posted in conspicuous places. Moore and Blair, JJ., dissenting.</p> <p>5. Same.</p> <p>It is only where the defendant has sanctioned a custom to violate its rules that they will be deemed abrogated.1</p> <p>6. Same.</p> <p>Plaintiff was guilty of contributory negligence in using the south-bound track to go north with his locomotive. Moore and Blair, JJ., dissenting.</p> <p>7. Witnesses — Evidence — Adverse or Hostile Witness — Statutes.</p> <p>Under Act No. 307, Pub. Acts 1909, permitting a party to call for cross-examination agents and employés of the opposite party, the testimony of defendant’s employés or servants so introduced by plaintiff was a part of his case, and the witnesses were not defendant’s witnesses.</p>

Case by Thomas Gr. Connor against the Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Railway Company for personal injuries. A judgment for defendant on a verdict directed by the court is reviewed by plaintiff on writ of error. This case was before the court at the October, 1909, •term, and will be found reported in 158 Mich. 688 (123 N. W. 533). The facts are there set out with sufficient clearness.

Case by Mary A. Guntermann, administratrix of the estate of John W. F. Guntermann, deceased, against the Michigan Central Railroad Company for the unlawful killing of plaintiff’s decedent. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant brings error.

Case by Eose E. Graham, administratrix of the estate of Justin E. Graham, deceased, against the Detroit, Grand Haven & Milwaukee Eailway Company for the negligent killing of plaintiff’s decedent. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant brings error.

Case by Joseph Ducre against the Sparrow-Kroll Lumber Company and Charles B. Kroll for personal injuries. Judgment for plaintiff against said company only and it brings error.

<p>1. Carriers — Cash Pares — Ejecting Passengers.</p> <p>Where-a passenger on defendant’s train paid his fare, and the conductor, in placing the slip in his hat, by mistake indicated the wrong station, and later ejected the passenger who claimed that he attempted to explain the circumstances to the conductor but was not permitted to,' it was not necessary for him to pay his fare the second time to avoid ejection; it also appearing that the conductor had in his possession a slip and evidence of the amount paid, which he could have readily examined and ascertained plaintiff’s rights.1</p> <p>2. Same — Excessive Damages.</p> <p>A judgment of §350 was' not excessive for ejecting a passenger by the use of force, accompanied by abusive, profane, and improper language in the presence of plaintiff’s wife and other passengers.</p>

Bill by Edward P. Hammond and others against Prank B. Hibbler to enjoin defendant from conducting the sale of intoxicating liquors contrary to the terms of a written lease. Prom a decree for complainants, defendant appeals.

Case by the J. H. Worden Lumber & Shingle Company against the Minneapolis, St. Paul & Sault Ste. Marie Railway Company for negligently setting fire to plaintiff’s property. Judgment for defendant. Plaintiff brings error.

Clair; Tappan, J. Case by George A. Keeley against the City Electric Railway Company for personal injuries. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant brings error. The plaintiff, then nine years old, fell or was thrown under the wheels of one of defendant’s cars and was injured. The time was the afternoon of December 24, 1901.

<p>Error to Wayne; Rohnert, J.</p> <p>Assumpsit in justice’s court by Paul Wenzel against Eelix F. Kieruj for work done for defendant. On appeal -to the circuit court the cause was tried by a jury. Judgment for defendant.' Plaintiff brings• error.</p>

Case by Glenn Morse, administrator of the estate of Albert J. Morse, deceased, against the Detroit, Grand Haven & Milwaukee Railway Company for the unlawful killing of plaintiff’s decedent. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant brings error.

Case by Anna E. Creen, administratrix of the estate of John T. Creen, deceased, against the Michigan Central Railroad Company for the unlawful killing of plaintiff’s decedent. An order overruling a demurrer to plaintiff’s declaration is reviewed by defendant on writ of certiorari.

Case by Frederick Koehler against Daniel W. Abey and Edwin C. Palmer, copartners as the Detroit Wood Pulley Company, for personal injuries. A judgment for defendant on a verdict directed by the court is reviewed by plaintiff on writ of error. The plaintiff was employed by defendant in August, 1907, at work upon a planer or jointer. He was injured, and ascribes his injury to the fact that the machine was not guarded.

<p>Error to Arenac; Sharpe, J.</p> <p>Assumpsit by the Edwards Stanwood Shoe Company against Alice R. Curtis for goods sold and delivered. Judgmentfor defendant. Plaintiff brings error.</p>

Assumpsit in justice’s court by Fred J. Stone against Edward Frohlich for the purchase price of certain lumber. The cause was removed to the circuit court by appeal. Judgment for plaintiff on a verdict directed by the court. Defendant brings error.

Webster C. Jipson presented two claims against the estate of Daniel D. Baluss, deceased. Both were disallowed by the commissioners on claims, and on appeal to the circuit court judgment was entered for defendant estate.

Bill by Mike Scanlon against Charles Connor to set aside a deed of realty and a bill of sale of personalty for fraud. From a decree for complainant, defendant appeals.

Assumpsit by the board of water commissioners of the city of Detroit against the Butler Brothers Construction Company and another for expense incurred in protecting the water pipes of said city. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendants bring error.

<p>Error to Wayne; Donovan, J.</p> <p>Assumpsit by Frank G. Baxter and another against Thomas F. Cowhey for services rendered. Judgment for plaintiffs. Defendant brings error.</p>

<p>Exceptions before sentence from Monroe; McKay, J.</p> <p>Fred Kohler was' convicted of violating a village ordinance.</p>

Case by Andrew Johnson, administrator of the estate of August Johnson, deceased, against Willis K. Jackson, surviving partner of the firm of Tindle and Jackson, for the unlawful killing of plaintiff’s decedent. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant brings error.

Case by Julia Manos against the Detroit United Railway for personal injuries. A judgment for defendant on a verdict directed by the court is reviewed by plaintiff on writ of error.

Assumpsit by the Detroit Savings Bank, assignee of George E. Currie, against Ralph Loveland, John A. Russell, George W. Williams, and George N. Skinner, for labor and materials furnished. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant Loveland brings error.

<p>1. Master and Servant — Personal Injuries — Warning and Instructing Servant — Contributory Negligence.</p> <p>It was a question of fact for the jury to determine whether or not an inexperienced employé who had not been warned of the danger of removing a sliver from between saws, and whose arm was jerked into the saw by a long sliver which he tried to remove, was guilty 'of negligence contributing to his injury.</p> <p>3. Same — Sufficiency oe Instruction.</p> <p>The question of the sufficiency of his employer’s instruction and of the necessity of warning the servant, who had been told to watch another employed at similar work, and had observed him for half an hour before commencing to work, was also for the jury.</p> <p>3. Same — Acts of Fellow-Servant.</p> <p>Defendant having introduced evidence to show that plaintiff had received a warning from a servant of defendant not to remove splinters from the saw by hand, the court erred in charging the jury that he would be bound only by a warning from some person who was known by plaintiff to have had experience about gang saws.</p>

<p>1. Interpleader — Definition—Nature.</p> <p>A bill of interpleader is a bill filed for the protection of a person from whom several persons claim, legally or equitably, the same thing, debt, or duty, but who has incurred no independent liability to any of them, and does not himself claim an interest in the matter.</p> <p>2. Same — Landlord and Tenant — Leases.</p> <p>A landlord, who leased premises and subsequently made a second lease, subject to the first, providing that the subsequent lessee should have possession on default of the first, may not maintain a bill of interpleader against the tenants because the subsequent lessee claims that the prior tenant has violated the terms of his lease by subletting without stipulated written consent of the landlord.</p> <p>. 8. Same — Descent and Distribution — Parties.</p> <p>The guardian of one of the landlord’s heirs has no greater right to file such bill than had the ancestor.</p> <p>4. Equity — Jurisdiction—Multiplicity of Suits — Bill of Peace —Adequate Remedy at Law.</p> <p>Nor may a landlord, who has successively leased the same premises to different persons, compel them to answer a bill in equity on the ground that it would avoid a multiplicity of suits.</p> <p>5. Same — Guardian and Ward — Instructions of Court.</p> <p>Nor is the guardian of one of the heirs succeeding to an interest in such premises entitled to litigate the rights of the respective tenants as joint defendants in equity, on the theory that such guardian is entitled to instructions from the court.</p>

Clair; Tappan, J. Assumpsit by the National Coal Company against the Cincinnati Gas Coke, Coal & Mining Company. An order overruling a motion to quash the service of process is reviewed by defendant on certiorari.

Assumpsit by the National Coal Company against the Cincinnati Gas Coke, Coal & Mining Company for goods sold and delivered. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant brings error.

Case by Anna M. Anderson, administratrix of the estate of Louis E. Anderson, deceased, against the Michigan Central Railroad Company, for the negligent injury and death of decedent. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant brings error.

Case and trover by Hugh Dillon against Frank D. Craig and others. A judgment for certain defendants on a verdict directed by the court is reviewed by plaintiff on writ of error. Affirmed as to a part of the defendants.

<p>Error to Wayne; Mandell, J.</p> <p>August Oblaser was convicted of murder in the second degree.</p>

Mandamus by the Michigan railroad commission against the Michigan Central Railroad Company to compel the interchange of traffic between respondent and the Detroit United Railway, under an order of the commission.

<p>Error to Kent; Perkins, J.</p> <p>Assumpsit by David R. White against the United States Gypsum Company for breach of a contract of employment. Judgment for defendant. Plaintiff brings error.</p>

Mandamus by Franz C. Kuhn, attorney general, on the relation of James Vernor, against the common council and election commission of the city of Detroit to require the respondents to submit at a special election a proposed amendment to the municipal charter.

<p>Error to Wayne; Murfin, J.</p> <p>Case by James Strachan against John H. Meyeringand another for fraud. A judgment for defendants on a verdict directed by the court is reviewed by plaintiff on writ of error.</p>

Bill by George W. Steward against the Traverse City State Bank, Samuel Garland, executor of tbe estate of' Julius T. Hannah, deceased, and Elsie R. Hannah, as. executrix thereof, for an accounting. From a decree for complainant, defendants appeal.

Assumpsit by John F. Moloney and others as assignees of Thomas McRae against the Germania Fire Insurance Company upon a policy of insurance. Judgment for plaintiffs. Defendant brings error.

, presiding. Bill by Carl A. Johnson and others against the city of Escanaba to set aside a special assessment. From a decree for defendant, complainants appeal.

<p>Error to Ionia; Sessions, J., presiding.</p> <p>Lois J. Dougherty presented for probate an instrument purporting to be the will of John R. Dougherty, deceased. It was admitted to probate by the probate court, and Hiram Crandall and other contestants appealed to the circuit court. Judgment for proponent, and contestants bring error.</p>

Case by Luke Riley against William Roach for per» sonal injuries. A judgment for defendant on a verdict directed by the court is reviewed by plaintiff on writ of error.

<p>Error to Kent; Perkins, J.</p> <p>Bartolomeo Sartori was convicted of murder.</p>

Exceptions before sentence from the recorder’s court of the city of Detroit; Connolly, J. Frank Schafran was convicted of engaging in the business of selling intoxicating liquors without a license.

Assumpsit in justice’s court by Anna L. Hickey against Harry Lundy for goods leased to defendant’s wife upon a written contract. Prom a judgment for defendant, plaintiff appealed to the circuit court. A judgment for defendant on a verdict directed by the court is reviewed by plaintiff on writ of error.

Case-made from Barry; Smith, J. Ejectment by Nellie M. Schram as guardian of Horatio E. Warner, and in her personal right, and another, as plaintiffs, against Daniel W. Rogers. Judgment for plaintiffs. Defendant brings case-made.

Case by James S. Galloway against the Detroit United Railway for personal injuries. Judgment for defendant. Plaintiff brings error. Plaintiff hired a taxicab from the Bailey Auto Company of the city of Detroit and directed the driver to convey himself and daughter to Groase Pointe. He gave no further directions to the driver and did not attempt to control his actions either in a selection of the route or in the matter of speed.

Replevin by Delbert Cronk against Maynard Mulvaney for a quantity of hay. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant brings error. This is an action of replevin to recover the possession of certain hay cut and stored by the plaintiff upon the defendant’s premises.

Assumpsit by the city of Alpena for the use of Frank W. Gilchrist against the Title Guaranty & Surety Company and others on a statutory bond. A judgment for defendants on a verdict directed by the court is reviewed by plaintiff on writ of error.

<p>1. Landlord and Tenant — Injunction — Intoxicating Liquors.</p> <p>Having an adequate remedy at law, a brewing company which leased premises to a saloon keeper on condition that he should not purchase beer from any other party, is not entitled to an injunction against the saloon keeper to restrain him from buying beer from other manufacturers as the exigencies of his trade required, when it appeared that the tenant sold the lessor’s beer as his principal commodity, and secured permission orally from defendant to sell the beer of other wholesale dealers as it might be called for, and that the amount of other beer so purchased was small and the probable damages inconsiderable.</p> <p>2. Same — Frauds, Statute of — Lease—Parol Waiver — Equity.</p> <p>A waiver, invalid because not in writing, of conditions contained in a lease for a term of years, may be treated as. an equitable estoppel to enjoin a breach of the written instrument.</p>

Assumpsit by Francis A. Hyatt against the Grand Rapids Brewing Company for rent due. A judgment for plaintiff on a verdict directed by the court is reviewed by defendant on writ of error.

<p>1. Insurance — Words and Phrases — Outside.</p> <p>In a policy of insurance covering a gasoline launch, permission to store the boat “outside,” when construed with the remainder of the policy and with the application, signified that the boat might be stored out from the shore in the waters of the adjacent bay..</p> <p>2. Same — Marine Insurance — Exposing Buildings.</p> <p>Under the terms of the policy providing that the distance to exposing buildings should be 500 feet, only such buildings as increased the danger because of the use of fire were intended. Ostrander and McAlvay, JJ., dissenting.</p> <p>3. Same — Statutes—Breach op Condition.</p> <p>Notwithstanding 2 Comp. Laws, § 5180, providing that no policy of fire insurance shall hereafter be declared void for the . breach of any condition if the insurer has not been injured by such breach or the loss has not occurred by reason thereof, the policy became void for breach of a promissory warranty that the distance to exposing' buildings should be 500 feet.</p>

<p>Master and Servant — Competency op Employes — Negligence_</p> <p>Fellow-Servant — Incompetent Engineer — Mines and Mining. Evidence offered to show the incómpetency of an engineer employed in defendant’s coal mine examined, and held, to require the direction of a verdict for defendant.</p>

Case by Elbert Y. Ingersoll, as administrator of the estate of William Quigley, deceased, against the Detroit & Mackinac Railway Company for the wrongful killing of decedent. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant brings error. For previous decision in this case, see Ingersoll v. Railway Co., 163 Mich. 269 (134 N. W. 441).

Assumpsit by McArthur Cashin and Charles Narron copartners as the Flint Construction & Realty Company, against William C. Pliter for materials furnished and for work and labor performed. A judgment for defendant on a verdict directed by the court is reviewed by plaintiffs on writ of error.

Case by George Tabinski, by his next Mend, against A. Harvey’s Sons Manufacturing Company, Limited, for personal injuries. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant brings error. Plaintiff, a young lad 14 years and 6 months of age, was injured while in the employ of the defendant, which is a manufacturer and wholesale dealer in plumbers’ supplies.

Bill by George F. Sherwood against Fred L. Davis, administrator of the estate of Jennie L. Davis, deceased, and others, to set aside a certain deed of land and for further relief. From a decree dismissing the bill, complainant appeals.

<p>1. Master and Servant — Negligence — Defective Elevator — Inspection — Evidence.</p> <p>In an action for personal injuries charged to have resulted from the fall of defendant’s elevator that plaintiff claimed had previously given evidence of a defective and unsafe condition, the trial court erred in excluding answers to questions asked of plaintiff’s expert witness, in support of the charge contained in his declaration as to defendant’s failure to inspect the elevator, whether an inspection would have disclosed certain defects, how often the brakes and safety devices ought to be inspected, and how the inspection should be made.1</p> <p>2. Same.</p> <p>Nor should the court have directed a verdict for defendant for the alleged reason that there was no sufficient evidence of any neglect, upon testimony having a tendency to show that the elevator had failed to stop some four weeks prior to the injury, that the safety catch had been jarred and was fastened back, that the elevator twice dropped during the week before the accident, and also a few hours previously.</p> <p>8. Same.</p> <p>Plaintiff could not be required to show by direct testimony what was the specific defect that caused the improper working of the elevator.</p>

Clair; Tappan, J. Bill by Amanda J. Geel and others against Theophilus A. Goulden, the Factory Land Company, Limited, and Charles Wellman, trustee, to foreclose a land contract. The Factory Land Company, Limited, by cross-bill, prayed for affirmative relief. From a decree for complainants against defendant the Factory Land Company, and for the other defendants dismissing the complainants’ bill, defendant the Factory Land Company appeals.

Summary proceedings by William H. Flynn against Nathaniel E. Bachner and another for the possession of leased premises. From a judgment for defendants, complainant appealed to the circuit court which affirmed the order of the commissioner. Complainant brings error.

Ejectment by George H. Powell against Minnie Singer Pierce. Judgment for plaintiff: defendant was awarded the value of certain improvements made upon the premises, and remitted part of the verdict. Both parties appeal.

<p>Appeal and Error — Demurrer in Equity — Special Demurrer —Multieariousness.</p> <p>A demurrer for multiplicity, inconsistency, and insufficiency of a bill to declare certain conveyances given as security for a debt and to redeem therefrom is a special demurrer; and an order overruling it is not appealable.</p>

Marquette; Flannigan, J. Bill by Arthur Brooks against Rush Culver for an injunction and other relief. From a decree dismissing the bill, complainant appeals.

Case by Delos Johnson against George Sergeant and Lewis Sergeant for personal injuries. An order overruling a demurrer to plaintiff’s declaration is reviewed by defendant Lewis Sergeant on writ of certiorari.

<p>Insurance — Mutual Benefit Associations — Waiver of Breach of Insured.</p> <p>Where plaintiff, a member of a mutual fire insurance association, organized to insure members of a grange order in good standing, withdrew from the local grange and ceased paying dues, forfeiture of the policy of insurance according to the strict terms thereof was waived by the insurer which took no action to cancel the polioy and continued to receive assessments upon the policy after notice to its secretary of the status of insured.</p>

Mandamus by Thomas Early and another against Howard Wiest, one of the circuit judges for the county of Ingham, to compel respondent to recall an execution issued upon a judgment in arbitration proceedings.

Case by Ella M. Stanton against Bart Foley and another for unlawful sales of intoxicating liquors to plain-Plaintiff tiff’s husband. Judgment for defendants, brings error.

Case by Sarah Clark against the Detroit United Railway for personal injuries. A judgment for defendant on a verdict directed by the court is reviewed by plaintiff on writ of error.

Bill by Siegmund C. Brasch against Charlotte Brasch for divorce. Upon a cross-bill filed by defendant a decree of divorce was awarded her and from the alimony fixed she appeals.

<p>Assumpsit by Arthur F. Mclntire against Henry W. Carr. On motion of appellant to remand the record for amendment and correction.</p>

Information in the nature of quo warranto by Louis H. Osterhous, prosecuting attorney of Ottawa county, on the relation of Engbertus Vander Veen, against Arthur Van Duren to test the title of respondent to the office of justice of the peace. An order sustaining a demurrer to the information is reviewed by relator on writ of error.

<p>Error to Calhoun; North, J.</p> <p>Case by Myrtle Clair against the Battle Creek Journal Company for libel. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant brings error.</p>

Petition by Charles T. Wilkins and Charles W. Casgrain, amici curiae, for the disbarment of George W. Radford. A judgment of disbarment is reviewed by respondent on writ of certiorari.

Case by James Foley against the Grand Rapids & Indiana Railway Company for personal injuries, — prosecuted for the benefit of plaintiff’s attorneys after settlement, to satisfy their lien. Judgment for plaintiffs for less than the amount claimed, upon a verdict directed by the court. Plaintiffs bring error.

Mandamus by George V. Weimer, prosecuting attorney of Kalamazoo county, against Frank E. Knappen, circuit judge of said county, to compel respondent to vacate an order quashing an information wherein William S. Forler was charged with selling and keeping for sale intoxicating liquors without having procured a license therefor.

Assumpsit by the International Text-Book Company, a foreign corporation, against William A. Roberts for damages on a declaration specially alleging a contract in writing. Judgment for defendant. Plaintiff brings error.

Bill by Franz C. Kuhn, attorney general of the State of Michigan, on the relation of Milton A. McRae, against William B. Thompson, mayor of the city of Detroit, and others, to restrain the issuance of library, sewer, school, and waterworks bonds duly authorized. From a decree for complainant, defendants appeal. This cause was consolidated with the mandamus proceedings above mentioned in the Supreme Court and both were argued and submitted as one cause.

<p>Habeas corpus by Herbert W. Price against Leo J. Rimmele, sheriff of Saginaw county, to secure his discharge from custody after conviction.</p>

Case by Bartholomew Huber against the Twin City General Electric Company for personal injuries. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant brings error. Plaintiff, a man 40 years of age, had for 20 years been following the occupation of an electric lineman. He was experienced in the handling of live wires. In his work he customarily repaired electric light, telephone, and telegraph wires. These wires sometimes carried a high voltage.

Case by James Highland against the township of Garfield for injuries to plaintiff’s horse resulting from a defective condition of the highway. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant brings error.

<p>1. Intoxicating Liquors — Civil-Damage Action — Nominal Damages — Habitual Drunkard.</p> <p>Under undisputed evidence that defendant sold plaintiff’s husband, an habitual drunkard, intoxicating liquors, after having been notified not to do so, that plaintiff was injured in the matter of her support, suffered personal violence at his hands, that her property was destroyed and she suffered in her feelings, a verdict of six cents damages was against the weight of the evidence and should have been set aside on motion for a new trial.</p> <p>2. Same — Husband and Wipe — Privileged Communications — Witnesses.</p> <p>The court erred in refusing to admit testimony of the wife as to her husband’s conduct while he was intoxicated from liquor sold by defendant: the evidence was not of a privileged character.</p>

<p>Error to Bay; Collins, J.</p> <p>Case by Leslie D. Madill against Gilbert A. Currie for libel. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant brings error.</p>

Trespass quare clausum fregit ia justice’s court by Charles Weston against David C. Dunn and others. The justice certified the case to the circuit court on the ground that the title to land was involved. Judgment for plaintiff on a verdict directed by the court. Defendants bring error.

Replevin in justice’s court by William Rameau against Edward F. Yalley and Ralph Peterson. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendants appealed to the circuit court where judgment for nominal damages was entered against defendant Peterson, and as to defendant Yalley judgment of no cause of action was entered. Defendants bring error.

<p>1. Foreclosure — Practice—Notice oe Proceedings.</p> <p>While notice of filing of a decree of foreclosure and of the steps taken to advertise and sell is required by the rules and practice of the court of chancery, a defendant who had actual notice in season of the sale and report of sale, and whose attorney attended the sale and filed exceptions to the commissioner’s report, was not prejudiced by oomp’ainant’s omission to give formal notice.</p> <p>2. Same — Decree—Appeal and Error — Supreme Court.</p> <p>Where a decree of foreclosure as filed in the Supreme Court required payment to be made to reinstate defendant under the mortgage on or before January 5th, but was not signed and filed until January 7th, the defendant who was allowed the statutory right to redeem within six months after sale, which did not take place for two months, could not complain.</p> <p>3. Same — Taxes—Surplus.</p> <p>Taxes paid by the complainant after decree and before sale were properly allowed to complainant, who bid in the premises for the amount due, including them.</p> <p>4. Same.</p> <p>As mortgagee complainant would be entitled to an equitable lien for such amounts, and to reimbursement out of any surplus arising from the sale of the premises.</p> <p>5. Same.</p> <p>A party relying on irregularities must complain promptly, or lose his right to relief.</p>

Case by Robert Pollock against the Detroit United Railway for personal injuries. Defendant filed a plea to the jurisdiction. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant brings error.

Bill by Charles J. Davis and another against James R. McCamman, as administrator of the estate of Malvina R. McCamman, deceased, and another, for an accounting and other relief. From a decree sustaining a plea to complainants’ amended bill, complainants appeal.

Bill by Stanislaus ChronowsM against John Zielinski, Barbara Zielinski, and the German-American Bank for the foreclosure of a mortgage. From a decree for complainant, defendants Zielinski appeal.

Case by Charles R. Thomas as administrator of the estate of Alta Thomas, deceased, against the township of Byron, for the wrongful injury and death of decedent. Judgment for defendant. Plaintiff brings error.

Case by John Prisel, by next friend, against James D. Coney for personal injuries. A judgment for defendant on a verdict directed by the court is reviewed by plaintiff on writ of error.

Joseph; Yaple, J. Assumpsit by the Kamm & Schellinger Brewing Company against the St. Joseph County Village Fire Insurance Company on a policy of insurance. A judgment for defendant on a verdict directed by the court is reviewed by plaintiff on writ of error.

Assumpsit by George C. Crane against George A. Ross and Mildred E. Ross for broker’s commissions. A judgment for plaintiff against defendant George A. Ross for less than the amount claimed, and for defendant Mildred E. Ross on a directed verdict, is reviewed by plaintiff on writ of error.

Assumpsit by Eugene Hall and Clarence M. Hall, co-' partners, against the Duplex-Power Car Company for damages for fraud and breach of warranty. A judgment for defendant on a verdict directed by the court is reviewed by plaintiffs on writ of error.

<p>Appeal from Wayne; Hosmer, J.</p> <p>Bill by Charles Yan Gallow and Joseph Yan Gallow against Mary Theresa Brandt and others for the construction of a will. From a decree for defendants, complainants appeal.</p>

<p>Error to Cass; Des Yoignes, J.</p> <p>Case by Charles O. Buman against the Michigan Central Railroad Company for personal injuries. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant brings error.</p>

<p>Appeal from Wayne; Murfin, J.</p> <p>Bill by Veronica Schelowski against Frank Pawlowski and others in aid of an execution. From a decree dismissing the bill, complainant appeals.</p>

Bill by the Detroit & Mackinac Railway Company against the Sioux City Seed & Nursery Company for an injunction. Defendant filed a cross-bill praying for an injunction against complainant. From a decree for complainant, defendant appeals. In the year IBS’?, the complainant railway extended its road through the city of Alpena. Its main line ran along Tenth street through said city.

<p>Error to Bay; Collins, J.</p> <p>Assumpsit by Samuel C. Pirie and others, doing business as Carson, Pirie, Scott & Company, a copartnership, against John F. Jozwiak for goods sold and delivered. Judgment for plaintiffs. Defendant brings error.</p>

Case by Charles Nissly against the Detroit, Jackson & Chicago Railway Company for the negligent killing of plaintiff’s colt. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant brings error.

Mandamus by Fritz Rohde to compel James O. Murfin, one of the circuit judges of Wayne county, to vacate an order temporarily restraining relator from engaging in the sale of intoxicating liquors in the village of Grosse Pointe, in said county.

Mandamus by Philip Ploof against Bangor township board to compel the respondent to grant relator’s application for a retail liquor license. An order issuing the writ is reviewed by respondent on writ of certiorari.