Volume 22 — West Virginia Reports

SNYDER, Judge, furnishes the following statement of the case: This suit was instituted in the circuit court of Monongalia county, on 11th day of February, 1874, by John 0. Vangil-der against John II. Hoffman and L. S. Hough, trustee.

SNYDER, Jud&e, furnishes the following statement of the case: This is a writ of error to an order, made by the circuit court of Lewis county, March 16,1882, setting aside the ver-dict of the jury and grauting a new trial in an action of assumpsit brought by the plaintiff in error in the county court of said county, February 29, 1879, against the defendant in error for one thousand six hundred and forty-seven dollars and eighty-four cents, and transferred by operation of law…

<p>The facts of the case are stated in the opinion of the Court.</p>

Snyder, Judge, furnishes the following statement of the ease: The appellants, Sarah K. Hansford and others, were co-defendants with John Claypool, Andrew Johnson, the Chesapeake Coal Company and others, in a suit brought in the circuit court of Kanawha countyl,by E. E. Elagg against said defendants.

GREEN, Judge, furnishes the following statement of the ease: On July 2, 1878, Uriah Ilevener presented to the circuit court of Pocahontas county his bill of complaint praying an injunction.

GreeN, Judge, furnishes the following statement of the case: On September 2, 1873, S. P. McCormick and Lewis Iiay-mond executed and filed an undertaking in a chancery cause, pending in the circuit' court of Taylor county, wherein one Jacob B. McCormick, a non-resident of this State, was plain-tift, and Silas P. Bailey was defendant, which undertaking was in these words : “Jacob B. McCormick, a non-resident of this State, having-commenced his suit in equity against said Silas…

Woods, Judge, furnishes the following statement of the case: At the general election on the 12th clay of October, 1880, in Summers county, Elbert Fowler, William K. Thompson, and J. W. Malcom were candidates, and were voted for, for the office of prosecuting attorney of said county.

<p>The facts of the case are fully stated in the opinion of the Court.</p>

Q-reeN, Judge, furnishes the following statement of the case: In June, 1881, John G. Beard and Elizabeth J. Beard, his wife, Thomas C. Blair, Doctor F. Blair, J. C. Blair, Wm. M. Blair, Wm. Hill and'Mariam J. Hill, his wife, Shannon Clutter, Wm. Clutter and Enos Clutter filed their bill in the circuit court of Greenbrier county against Abram M. Beard and William L. McNeal.

GREEN, Judge, furnishes the following statement of the case: At November rules,. 1873, the plaintiffs filed the following declaration in the circuit court of Cabell: “In the Circuit Court of Cabell County, to-wit: “John N. Buffington, Peter C. Buffington, J. Harvey Poage, W. H. Hagen, Jno. Hove Bussell, I). W. Emmons and M. Erskine.

<p>The facts of tbe case are stated in the opinion of the Coui't.</p>

<p>1. The declarations of a deceased person as to the corners and lines of a tract of land owned by him, when the declarations were made, are admissible as evidence, if at the time they were made he had no interest to misrepresent. But if the circumstances and his situation at the time show, that he had an interest to make false .representations as to corners or lines, such declarations are inadmissible, (p. 159.;</p> <p>2. Joseph Stull sr. owned a tract of land, which he conveyed to his son Joseph jr., and he to the plaintiffs, who brought an ejectment suit against defendant, who claimed beyond the line claimed by plaintiffs; and the plaintiffs, to prove the lines and corner as they claimed them, offered to prove declarations made by Joseph Stull sr., deceased more than twenty-five years before, when he , owned the land, that the lines and corners were situated as claimed by plaintiffs. Held :</p> <p>The declarations were inadmissible.</p>

<p>The facts of the ease are stated in the opinion of the Court.</p>

SeydeR, Judge, famishes the following statement of the-case: In 1859, Luther Haymond, trustee, sold to H. Snowden Andrews eight hundred and nineteen acres oí land located in Harrison county, at the price of fifteen thousand one hundred and fifty-one dollars and fifty cents, a part of which Andrew's paid in cash and tor the residue gave his bonds with Gr.

<p>The facts of the case are stated in the opinion of the Court.</p>

GbeeN, Judoe, furnishes the following statement of the case: This was an action of debt brought in the circuit court of Wetzel county in the name of the State oí West Virginia sueing for the use of the Board ot Education of Proctor district in Wetzel county against A. P. Brookover and his sureties in his official bond as sheriff of Wetzel county. The declaration was in the usual form and alleged certain breaches of the condition of the bond not necessary to be stated.

(xREEN, Judge, furnishes the following statement of the case : A. Jelenko &Bro. instituted an action of assumpsit in the county court of Kanawha against Sylvester Coleman. On the 1st clay of November, 1875,the defendant pleaded non-assumpsit, payment and set-off, and the court gave him leave to file specifications of payments and sets-off, and issue was thereupon joined.

Green, Judge, furnishes the following statement of the case: On November 27, 1882, B. T. Hale instituted an action of trespass on the case against F. A. Boylen in the-circuit court of Bitchie county.

<p>The facts of the case are sufficiently stated in the opinion of the Court.</p>

<p>The facts of the case are fully stated in the opinion of the Court.</p>

<p>The facts of the ease appear in the opinion of the Court.</p>

G-REEN, Judge, furnishes the following statement of the case: Isaac Moore at the September rules, 1882, filed his bill-against Sallie G. Ligón and John Ligón her husband.

<p>The facts of the ease are stated in the opinion of the Court.</p>

<p>1. It is the purpose of a notice, on which to base a motion for judgment, to acquaint the defendant with the grounds, on which he is to be proceeded against; and if it be so plain that the defendant cannot mistake its object, it is sufficient, however wanting it may be in form and technical accuracy, (p. 311.)</p> <p>2. It is the duty of an ex-sheriff, who has in his hands moneys belonging to the board of education of a district in the county, upon the demand of said board by an order, made and signed by its president and secretary, and delivered to him requiring him to pay such moneys to the present sheriff, and treasurer of the board, to pay the same upon such order, unless he has legal grounds for refusing to pay the same. (p. 313.)</p> <p>3. A motion may be made in the name of the board of education to receive money of a sheriff and his sureties on his official bond, (p. 313.)</p>

<p>The- facts of the case are stated in the opinion of the Court.</p>

<p>The facts of the case are stated in the opinion of the Court.</p>

Green, Judge, furnishes the following statement of the case: This was an action of debt brought January, 1878, in the circuit court of Monroe county on the following injunction bond: . “Know all men by these presents, that we, John P. Hill, ■William S. Hill and-, are held and firmly bound unto the Northwestern Bank of Virginia in the just and full suni of nine hundred and forty dollars, lawful money of Virginia, to be paid to the said Northwestern Bank .of Virginia, .or his…

Woods, Judse, furnishes the following statement of the case •: On the 26th of April-, 1871, Augustus A. Chapman, Wm. H. French and Manelius Chapman, sued out of the clerk’s office of the circuit court of Mercer county, a summons in chancery against Joseph Maitland, Frank EL Lane, Cornelius Curtis, and certain other defendants, described as the administrator, heirs and widow of one Guy 1).

<p>The facts of t-lic- case are stated in the opinion of the Court.</p>

■ Snyder, Judge, furnishes the following statement of the case: 0. E. Wagner, a resident of the city of Wheeling, Ohio county, and in business there as the keeper of a livery stable on leased premises, by deed, duly acknowledged, dated June 16,1881, and recorded in said county June 18,1881, conveyed to Guy 11. 0.

<p>The facts of the case are fully stated in the opinion of the Court.</p>

<p>The facts of the case are stated in the opinion of the Court.</p>

GiieeN, Judge, furnishes the following statement of the case: This is an action of ejectment brought by A. A. Low against Harrison Settle in the circuit court of Fayette county in February 1881.

<p>The facts of the case are fully stated in the opinion of the Court.</p>

Woods, Judge, furnishes the following statement of the case: T. K. Knight and Luther Martin filed their bill in the circuit court of Doddridge county against L. K,.

<p>The facts of the case are sufficiently 'Stated in the opinion of the Court.</p>

. SNYDER, Judge, furnishes the following statement of the case: In March 1870, Moses F. Ward died intestate, without children, leaving a widow, Ellen 3). Ward, who, under the statute then in force, was the sole heir and distributee of his estate. The said Ward was the owner and died seized'of valuable lands, situate in Kanawha county, which he in his life-time had encumbered by several trust-deeds to secure debts. These trust-debts were unpaid at his death.

GreeN, Judge, furnishes the following statement of the case: On March 1, 1880, A. W. Rollins, trustee, and Julia Ann Entsminger presented their bill of injunction to the judges of the circuit coui’t of Mason county. The bill stated, that on June 17, 1871, Isaac Entsminger conveyed to A. ~W. Rollins, trustee, a certain mill and fifteen acres of land in said county for the use of his wife, said Julia Ann Entsminger.

Green, Judge, furnishes the following statement of the case: At the February rules, 1872, Lockey E. Tracey filed her bill in the circuit court of Mercer alleging, that she was the daughter of Edward… Held: that his deposition could be read. The court also permitted the deposition of E. G. Tracey to be read but excluded such portions of it, as related to transactions and conversations had with Parkinson Shu-mate.

<p>The facts of the case are fully stated in tlie opinion.</p>

<p>The facts of the case are stated in the opinion.</p>

Woods, Judge,, furnishes the following statement of the case: ' Benjamin F. Hoffman on the 22d of February, 1879, brought his action of debt in the county court of Taylor county against Thomas TI.

<p>The facts of the case are fully stated in the opinion of the Court.</p>

SNyder, Judge, furnishes the following statement of the case: James R. Kent and James T. Watson being the owners of a tract of about eighty thousand acres of land lying principally in Mercer county, Virginia, now West Virginia, several parcels of which had been sold but not conveyed by one Andrew Johnston as attorney in fact for the owners, and the said Watson, after said sales, having died intestate, without children, and his estate having descended to his collateral…

Shyder, Jud&e, furnishes the following statement of the case: In May, 1863, Alexander Lowther brought, what is known in the Virginia practice as a “ suit by foreign attachment,” against Cyrus Hall and others in the circuit court of Ritchie county under the provisions of the Code of Virginia, chapter 151, and the act of February 10, 1862, of the restored government of Virginia at Wheeling, to subject the estate of said Hall in said county to the payment of a legal demand of…

<p>The facts of the case fully appear in the opinion of the Court.</p>

<p>The facts of the case are stated in the opinion of the Court.</p>

<p>The facts of the ease appear in the opinion of the Court.</p>

Gpeen, Judge, furnishes the following statement of the case: The West Virginia Transportation Company, a corporation chartered by several acts of the Legislature of West Virginia, on August 7, 1882, presented its bill of injunction to to the judge of the circuit court of Ritchie county, in which it alleged, that it was incorporated as an internal improvement company by three acts of the Legislature of West Virginia, passed respectively on February. 26, 1867, (Acts of 1867,…

Woods, Judge, furnishes the following statement of the case : At February rules, 1882, Adam Bolyard and his wife (Sophia) Suffiah filed their bill in the circuit court of Taylor county against Mary Bolyard and her husband, Alexander Bolyard, alleging that by deed dated the 28th of December, 1880, they conveyed to the female defendant, then Mary Funk, then unmarried to said Alexander Bolyard, all of their real estate, which consisted of a farm of one hundred and seven acres…

Woods, Jud&e, furnishes the following statement of the case: William Hudkins on the 30th day of August, 1880, brought his action on the case in the circuit court of Brax-ton county against. Bobert J. Iiaskins, for one thousand dollars damages for the seduction of the plaintiff’s daughter and servant, Eliza L. Iiudkins.

<p>1. The effect of the late civil war between the United States and the Confederate States was to make, during- its pendency, every resident within the military lines of the Federáis the enemy of each and every resident within the military lines of the Confederates without regard to liis occupation, individual sympathies or opinions ; and such residents within the lines of the opposing belligerents could have no friendly intercourse, communication or business relations of any kind whatever with each other, (p. 667.)</p> <p>2. Where during said war a county of this State was abandoned by the Confederates and the clerk of the county court of said county went with them, taking with him all or the greater part of the records of his office, aud immediately thereafter said county passed into the actual possession and under the control of the Federáis, and so continued until they were driven out about four months thereafter — the said clerk all that time - remaining within the lines of the Confederates. Held :</p> <p>That no one residing in said county within the Federal lines could as the deputy of such clerk conduct the business of said clerk’s office within the Federal lines for or in the name of such clerk while he remained within the Confederate lines ; and the acts of any one attempting, during that time, to act as such deputy for and in the name of such clerk, within the Federal lines, are absolutely void. (p. 668.)</p> <p>3. There can he no such officer as a de facto deputy, (p. 669.)</p> <p>4. A conveyance of land duly acknowledged is copied upon one of the deed-books in the county court clerk’s office by a mere spoliator or intruder, and at the next term of said county court said conveyance is returned to the court among the list of deeds recorded in the office during the preceding vacation, and an order is made on the records of said court stating that said conveyance and others had been admitted to record in the clerk’s office of said county. Held :</p> <p>I. That such order of the county court did not make said conveyance a recorded instrument;</p> <p>II. That the placing of said conveyance upon the deed-book of said office being an unauthorized act and void, it is not a record and may, therefore, in a court of equity or by any other proper proceeding, be assailed and set aside upon parol evidence, (p. 671.)</p>

<p>The facts of the case are sufficiently stated in the opinion of the Court.</p>

<p>The facts of the case aro. fully stated in the opinion of the Court.</p>

JOHNSON, PRESIDENT, furnishes the following statement of the case: The plaintiff Grinnan, a resident of Virginia, having a large trust-fund in his hands, filed in Greenbrier circuit court his bill, in the nature of a cross-bill in the cause of Ghewning v. Cowan, for the proper distribution of the said trust-fund.

<p>The opinion of the Court contains the facts of the case.</p>

Green, Judge, furnishes the following statement of the case: Daniel Peclc at the July rules, 1879, in the county court of Ohio county filed his declaration in assumpsit against J. E. McNennan, administrator oí Mary Marling, deceased.

Green, Judge, furnishes the following statement of the case: The grand jury of Taylor county on the 27th day of July, 1881, presented Thomas Hughes for unlawfully and without a State license 'selling, offering and exposing for sale at retail in December, 1880, spirituous liquors, wine, porter, ale, beer and drinks of like nature to Edward L. Gelliousen.

<p>A statement of the facts of tlie case is contained in the opinion of the Court.</p>

<p>1. It is not error upon the trial of an indictment for shooting with intent to kill to charge the jury in general terms, “that if all the evidence and circumstances of the case warrant the finding, they may find the prisoner guilty of the offence charged in the indictment, or if all the facts and circumstances of the case warrant such finding, the jury may find the prisoner guilts'- of a part of the offence charged in said indictment, whether such part be a felony or misdemeanor.” If the prisoner had desired the court to give the jury more specific instructions as to what they might find, if warranted by the evidence, he'should have asked the court to so instruct the jury. (p. 763.)</p> <p>2. It was not error to refuse to instruct the jury, that evidence of good character cannot be received, in behalf of the prisoner, until his character has been assailed, (p. 764.)</p> <p>3. In reviewing the judgment of the court below the Appellate Court will not reverse the judgment and set aside the verdict, on the ground that there is a doubt of its correctness ; but the court must be satisfied, that the evidence is plainly insufficient to warrant the verdict, (p. 765.) •</p>

<p>The opinion of the Court contains a statement of the facts of the case.</p>

<p>The facts of flic case are sufficiently stated in the opinion of the Court.</p>

Woodb, Judge, furnishes the following statement of the case: On the 9th day of April, 1883, Joseph,Chambers was indicted in the circuit court of Ohio county for the simple larceny of a pocket-book containg thirty-eight dollars in money from Elizabeth Emblen in the city of Wheeling, in said county on the 16th of December, 1882. The indictment which contained two counts, was in the usual form.

<p>The opinion contains a statement of the facts of the case.</p>