Volume 22 — Ohio Circuit Court Reports, New Series

Spencer D. Corlett filed his petition in the court of common pleas setting out that he had a legal estate and was entitled to the possession of certain real estate, described in the petition, and praying to eject Robert J. Corlett from the premises. It was an ordinary petition in ejectment with a prayer for rents and profits, and damages for the detention of the premises by the defendant. On application of the plaintiff below the court of common pleas appointed a receiver.

<p>ACTION GROWING OUT OF THE FILING OF CHARGES OF UNPROFESSIONAL CONDUCT.</p> <p>Libel — Charges of Unprofessional Conduct on Part of Attorney, When Privileged.</p> <p>Charges of unprofessional conduct on the part of an attorney, filed with the clerk of a court in which the attorney practices, are privileged.</p>

<p>REMOVAL OF ASHES BY THE MUNICIPALITY A GOVERMENTAL FUNCTION.</p> <p>Municipal Corporations — Capacity in Which As7i.es are Removed — City ■ Employee Injured While so Engaged — Doctrine of Respondeat Superior Not Applicable — Obvious Risks.</p> <p>1. The removal of ashes by a municipality from business houses and , the residences of- private citizens is an exercise of a governmental function, and'not. of a private or. proprietary duty.</p> <p>2. But were a contrary holding to .bo made, no cause of action would . arise in the ease of one employed on an ash cart and with experience in that class of work, who complains that he injured himself lifting receptacles containing ashes because not enough help was provided for the work.</p>

<p>RIGHTS OF A NATIONAL BANK WITH REFERENCE TO THE REISSUE OF A LOST CERTIFICATE OF STOCK IN A PRIVATE CORPORATION.</p> <p>Corporations — Action for Restoration of a Lost Certificate of Stock— Defense of Ultra Vires in the Acquisition of the Stock by Plaintiff ■ Does Not Lie, When — Construction of the Prohibition Against the Molding by National Banks of the Stock of Private Corporations.</p> <p>In an action by a national bank for reissue of a lost certificate of stock in a private corporation, acquired by the bank in exchange for dishonored bonds and presumably for its protection, the defendant company, being a stranger to the executed contract whereby the bank became possessed of the stock, can not interpose the defense that the holding of the stock by the bank was ultra vires under the federal law and a reissue of the -certificate can not be required for that reason.</p>

<p>COMPENSATION TO COUNTY AUDITOR..</p> <p>Officers — County Auditors' Fees — Action on Bond of an Officer Not Maintainable to Recover Money Illegally Drawn from County Treasury.</p> <p>1. The county auditor is entitled to four per cent, of the tax collected and paid into the county treasury on property omitted and placed by him upon the duplicate, even though a tax inquisitor has been employed to aid him and furnish him with evidence in the performance of his duty, and is paid a percentage by the county.</p> <p>2. The county auditor is entitled to such fees for indexing the records of county commissioners, as other officers receive for like services.</p> <p>". The county auditor is entitled to compensation for preparing and supplying to assessors necessary blanks as provided in Section 1029, Revised Statutes.</p> <p>4. Section 1277, Revised Statutes of Ohio, authorizing the county prosecutor, kua sponte to begin an action to recover back public moneys illegally drawn out of the county treasury, does not permit him to sue on the bond of the officer who has drawn the money.</p>

<p>MEASURE OF DAMAGES IN AN ACTION AGAINST AN AGENT WHO EXCEEDED HIS AUTHORITY.</p> <p>Power of Attorney — Power to Sell Does Ptot Authorize Exchange of Property — Measure of Damages when Property is Wrongfully Disposed of.</p> <p>1. A power of attorney granting to the attorney the right to “sell and dispose of” certain premises does not authorize him to exchange them for ether real estate.</p> <p>2. Where property is exchanged for other property it can not be treated as a cash sale even though the deed recites a certain money consideration.</p> <p>3. Where an agent has exceeded his authority by exchanging his principal’s property for other property, title to which he has caused to be taken by certain relatives, but without any bad faith on his part, upon suit by the principal for damages, the measure of damages will be the actual value of the property disposed of and not the consideration recited in the deed.</p>

<p>LIABILITY OF RIPARIAN OWNER. FROM CONSTRUCTION OF A DAM.</p> <p>Waters — One Erecting Earn LiaUe for Injury to Land Not Overflowed.</p> <p>One wbo dams a water-course, thus raising the level of the water farther up stream, is liable in damages to a riparian owner whose land thereby becomes water-soaked and unproductive, even though the dam caused no actual overflow of water upon the land.</p>

<p>Error to the court, of common pleas.</p>