Volume 55 — Iowa Reports

<p> Appeal from Taylor District Court. </p> <p>In October, 1874, the plaintiff and defendant entered into partnership for the purpose of dealing in live-stock. There was no written contract of partnership. No capital stock was pnt into the firm at the commencement of the business. The members of the firm were to share equally in the profits and losses of the partnership. Quite a large amount of business was transacted by the firm up to January, 1877, when the partnership was dissolved. The' partners being unable to make a settlement as between themselves, this action was brought to effect that end. Each of the parties claimed that the other was indebted to the firm, and after the issues were made up the cause was referred to a referee to take the testimony and report his findings to the court. A trial was had before the referee, and his report was set aside by the court. The cause was referred to another referee. Another trial was had, and the referee repprted that the plaintiff was entitled to judgment against the defendant for the sum of $1,119.23, and interest from Jan. 31, 1877. Exceptions to the report were overruled, and judgment was entered thereon. Defendant appeals.</p>

<p> Appeal from Polla Gvrcuit Gowt. </p> <p>On the 14th day of November, 1878, the defendant .Ike Hyman executed to his brother, Joseph Hyman, a chattel mortgage upon all his stock of hats, caps, furs, gloves, robes, umbrellas, jewelry and gent’s furnishing goods and fixtures, in his two storerooms situated at numbers 402 and 411, Walnut street, Des Moines.</p> <p>On the 29th day of November, 1878, the defendant Ike Hyman executed to Goldman & Hyman a chattel mortgage upon the same' property. On the 29th day of November, 1878, but after the execution of the mortgage last aforesaid, Eddy, Harvey & Go. and Sweet, Dempster & Go. brought their respective suits in the United States Circuit Court, against the said Ike Hyman, for merchandise sold him in September, 1878, and caused writs of attachment to be levied upon said stocks of goods.</p> <p>On the same day the officer serving said writs of attachment, upon demand of Joseph Hyman, surrendered the goods to him as mortgagee, and garnished Joseph Hyman and Goldman & Hyman. After the notices of garnishment were served, but on the same day, the plaintiffs sued out their writ of attachment in the Polk Circuit Court, against the property of Ike Hyman, which was served by garnishing Joseph Hyman and Goldman & ITyman.</p> <p>Whilst these proceedings were pending, on the 9th day of December, 1878, the plaintiffs commenced this action to declare the mortgages fraudulent, and for the appointment of a receiver of the mortgaged property. On the 11th day of December, Í878, a receiver was appointed. On the same day George W. Gifford & Oo. filed a petition of intervention, claiming of the defendant Ike Iiyman $381, asking an attachment and praying, that they may be declared to have a lien upon any funds in the hands of the receiver, which may remain after the payment of the existing liens. On the 18th of December? 1878, the receiver sold the stock of goods to Goldman & Hyman for $5,850.0Q, and took from them a bond for payment. On the 14th day of May, 1879, Eddy, Harvey &'Co. recovered judgnfent against Ike Hyman for $691.00, and on the same day Sweet, Dempster & Oo. recovered judgment for $640.20. On the 28th day of August, 1879, the plaintiffs recovered judgment against Ike Hyman, in their attachment proceeding, for $1,411.92. On the 4th day of October, 1879, Eddy, Harvey & Oo. and Sweet, Dempster & Oo. filed petitions of intervention in this action.</p> <p>The court found that when the receiver took possession of the Said stock there was rent due from Ike Iiyman to the 'amount of $225 which was a first lien on said fund, that the mortgage to Joseph Hyman is a valid security to the amount of $3,547.67, and is a second lien upon the fund; that the mortgage to Goldman & Hyman is á valid security to the extent of $1,000, and is a third- lien upon the fund; that Goldman & Hyman are entitled to $75 as attorney’s fees, and $69 expended in taking possession of the property and advertising for sale; that after the payment of the above amounts the intervenors and plaintiffs have liens upon said fund in the following amounts and order:</p> <p>Eddy, TIarvey & Oo..................... $641.00</p> <p>Sweet, Dempster & Oo............ 640.20</p> <p>Clark Brothers......................... 1,411.92</p> <p>George Gifford & Co..................... 381.00</p> <p>. It was thereupon ordered that Goldman & Hyman pay to .the receiver $532.98, the balance due upon their purchase of .the property, and that the remainder in the hands of the receiver, after paying the expenses of the suit, be paid to the intervenors Eddy, Harvey & Co. The intervenors appeal.</p>

Appeal'from Ha/rdin Gi/rowit Qourt. The plaintiff is proponent of the will of Frederick M. Zack, deceased. The defendant contests the probate of the will, upon the ground that the testator at the time of making the will was sick with consumption, and had thereby become imbecile, or nearly so, and was under undue influence exerted by the proponent and his wife. There was a trial by jury, and verdict was rendered for the contestants.

The petition states one Booth did certain work and labor for Hilleker & Co., on a line of railroad then being constructed by the Leon, Mt. Ayr & Southwestern Railroad Company, and for the labor performed a time-check was given Booth showing the amount due; that O. H. Smith & Co. were the principal contractors, and they sublet to Neely & McPherson, who sublet to Hilleker & Co. A mechanic’s lien was asked on the railroad.

This is an action to recover damages for personal injuries inflicted by the defendant. Upon the production of the plaintiff’s evidence the court, pursuant to a request of defendant, instructed the jury to return a verdict for the defendant, which was done. The plaintiff excepted and appeals.

Tbe petition contains seventeen-counts and is based upon fifteen promissory notes, executed to Jereniiali Willcox, and a book account. Tbe note upon wbicli recovery is sought in tbe first count of tbe petition is for tbe sum of $2,000, dated February 14, 1868, and due January 1, 1869. Tbe seventeenth count of tbe petition is based upon a book account, tbe last item in which bears date of April 11, 1873.

The plaintiff, as sheriff of Montgomery county, conveyed certain convicts from Eed Oalc, tbe county seat of said county, to the penitentiary at Eort Madison. He also conveyed a minor to the reform school at Eldora, and certain insane persons to the hospital for the insane at Mount Pleasant. He also attended with a prisoner certain proceedings in habeas corpus.

<p>1. Divorce: inhuman treatment: evidence oonsídered. Evidence considered and held to show inhuman treatment of a wife by her husband, such as entitled her to a divorce.</p> <p>2.-: condonation. Where after a wife had ceased to live with her husband, and had commenced an action for a divorce, the husband, at an interview appointed to negotiate for a settlement, locked the room, and against her will, and by the exercise of some force, had sexual intercourse with the wife, it was held that such fact did not constitute a condonation by cohabitaron which would defeat her action.</p>

. Tins is a proceeding under Code § § 3154, 3155, to obtain a new trial in an action brought in the same court. A demurrer to the petition was overruled, and defendant refusing to answer, a judgment was entered granting relief to plaintiff. Defendant appeals.

<p> Appeal from Jasper Circuit Cowt. </p> <p>Action at law. Judgment for the defendant, and plaintiffs appeal.</p>

The plaintiff, as administrator of the estate of Joseph Ball, deceased, brings this action for the recovery of certain personal property which, it - is alleged, belongs to said estate.

The plaintiff filed a petition in equity asking for the settlement of the affairs of a partnership between him and the defendant. Afterwards the parties agreed to submit the matters in dispute to the arbitration of J. W. Brown, Julian Phelps and C. C. Reynolds. An order of submission was accordingly made by the court and the arbitrators were directed to make and file their award on or before the 20th day of July, 1879. The award was filed on the 27th day of October, 1879.

Agypeal from Shelby Disfriet Ooxvrt. Action to recover of defendants possession of certain real estate, and for damages alleged to have been sustained by being kept out of possession.

Action to recover damages alleged to have been received by the plaintiff, caused by the defective condition of a street in said city. Trial by jury, verdict and judgment for the defendant, and plaintiff appeals.

Action upon accounts for gas and cote furnished to defendant by tbe Des Moines Gas Company, and by plaintiff as receiver of tliat company. The defendant pleads a counter-claim for services rendered by him as an attorney at law- A judgment was rendered for plaintiff; only a part of de fondant’s counter-claim was allowed. Both parties appeal.

Action upon a promissory note and for the foreclosure of a mortgage. There was a judgment and decree of foreclosure against the defendant, and he appeals. The facts appear in the opinion.

Plaintiff brought an action against the defendant on an account for goods and merchandise sold and delivered. The petition prayed the issuance of a writ of attachment upon the ground that defendant had disposed of his property in part, and was about to make further disposition thereof, with intent to defraud his creditors. The writ was issued, and levied upon a stock of clothing owned by defendant, and in his store, and said store was closed by the sheriff.

Action on promissory notes. The defendants pleaded a counter-claim and stated one of them had leased a farm of the plaintiff and the latter had bound himself to “ put the fences on said farm in good repair;” that he had failed to do so, Avhereby the defendants had been damaged in the destruction of the crops by stock.

This is an action to recover damages for an alleged wrongful entry by defendant upon certain real estate, and willfully digging up and carrying away certaingrowing trees, the property of the plaintiff. The defendant admitted that he dug up and removed the trees from the plaintiff’s premises, but alleged that his entry was by mistake, wholly unintentional on his part.

These actions were brought to determine tbe authority of tbe county to levy and collect taxes upon certain lands situated within its limits. Tbe first aotioü is at law, and plainiff therein seeks to recover for taxes paid upon the lands for seven years, commencing with tbe year 1869; tbe second is to enjoin tbe collection of taxes levied by tbe county for three years, commencing with 1877.

Action in equity to establish and quiet title to certain land claimed by tbe plaintiff as swamp land. The defendant claims to have derived title to the same under the act of Congress of May 15, 1856, granting lands in this State to aid in the construction of railroads. The action was commenced in 1869, and the present is the third ajipeal taken in the case. Upon the first trial a judgment was rendered for the plaintiff. Upon appeal the judgment was reversed. 39, Iowa, 507.

This action was commenced in the Polk Circuit Court to recover for injuries claimed to have been sustained through a defective sidewalk on a street of the defendant. The venue was changed to the Warren Circuit Court. The cause was tried to a jury and a verdict was returned for the plaintiff for $5,500. The motion for a new trial was overruled and judgment was entered upon the verdict. The defendant appeals.

Action on a promissory note which the defendant had indorsed to the plaintiff. A counter-claim was pleaded. Trial by jury, who were instructed to find for the plaintiff, which they did, and judgment having been rendered on the verdict the defendant appeals.

The plaintiffs are the owners of certain lots in the city of Sioux City adjacent to Elm and Third streets, and to an-alley running through block forty-four in said city. Upon the lots owned by'the plaintiffs it is averred that there is a valuable brewery and other buildings and certain beer cellars, one or more of which extended under ground across the line of a street, and into the street some distance.

Action at law upon a guardian’s bond. There were both legal and equitable defenses pleaded; the issues of the first were submitted to a jury, those upon the last were submitted to tbe court, a verdict was bad for plaintiff, and tbe court found upon tbe equitable issue for tbe same party, and judgment was rendered accordingly. Defendant Kalbach appeals.

Action to replevy a stock of goods alleged to be worth $381.54. The plaintiff claims 'the right of possession by virtue of two chattel mortgages executed by one Lovett, the owner of the goods.

On the first day of February, 1875, the plaintiff executed to tbe order of Carpan Carter a promissory note for $300, and secured tiro same by a chattel mortgage. Carter sold and transferred the note and mortgage to one Daniel Miller.

<p>1. Verdict: inconsistent with special findings. Where a jury found specially facts which, under an instruction given by the court, would entitle the defendant to a verdict, it was held that a general verdict in favor of the plaintiff should have been set aside.</p> <p>2. Practice in the Supreme Court: entry of final judgment. A final judgment will not be entered in favor of an appellant which will prevent the appellee from raising questions upon exceptions reserved in the court below.</p>

It was averred in the petition that the plaintiff is a physician, and that defendants are engaged in the retail drug business; that on or about the 13th of December, 1879, the defendants sold and delivered to one Olsen certain intoxicating liquors contrary to law; that said Olsen drank the same and became intoxicated thereby, and while under the influence of said liquors, and on his way to his home, he was dangerously injured by reason of said intoxication, and required the…

The petition of plaintiff alleges in substance that for the fiscal year 1878-9, and the two prior years, one Philip Roush was the duly elected and qualified treasurer of the plaintiff; that during said period the defendant, as treasurer of, Pottawattamie county, without any order or warrant drawn upon him by the auditor of said county, signed by the president and countersigned by the secretary of plaintiff, and without any warrant drawn by the president and countersigned by…

Action to reform and foreclose a mortgage executed by the defendant Young. The land mortgaged was described as being in range forty-two, whereas, it is, in fact, in range forty-three. The right to the reformation and foreclosure against the defendant Young is not denied.

Action in chancery for the specific performance of a contract to convey land. Upon a trial on the merits a decree was entered granting the relief sought in the petition. Defendants appeal.

<p>1. Evidence: malicious prosecution: enmity between the parties. In. an action to recover damages for malicious prosecution, evidence is admissible to show hostility and unfriendly feeling entertained by the defendant toward the plaintiff prior to the alleged prosecution.</p> <p>2. ——: -. Evidence considered which was held to support a verdict for damages on account of malicious prosecution. '</p>

The plaintiff obtained a judgment against one Robinson, and afterward Robinson obtained a judgment against the plaintiff. Robinson, for a valuable consideration, assigned Ms judgment to tbe defendants, wbo bad no notice of tbe plaintiff’s judgment against Robinson. An execution was issued upon each judgment and put into tbe bands of tbe sheriff. Tbe plaintiff claims tbe right to have tbe one judgment set off against tbe other. Tbe defendants deny this right.

Action in equity, the object of which is to restrain the • defendant from practicing as a physician and surgeon in the town of Mitchellville and its vicinity. Thére was judgment for the plaintiff, and defendant appeals.

Elijah Everett was engaged in the stock business in Cass county in this State, in the year 1875, and for some time thereafter. In November, 1875, he borrowed of the plaintiff the sum of $800. The plaintiff was then and still is a resident of the State of Ohio. On the 28th of April, 1876, said Everett executed a mortgage upon certain chattels to secure tbe payment of said loan, and delivered tbe same to tbe recorder of Cass county for record.

The. plaintiff is a corporation existing under the general incorporation law. The defendant is a school district, and the owner of certain real estate within the city limits which is used solely for school purposes. The city council determined that a certain sidewalk in front of said real estate should be repaired. The city furnished the material and caused the same to b'e done, and seeks in this action to recover therefor.

Action to recover compensation as deputy treasurer and collector of delinquent taxes. The plaintiff was appointed deputy treasurer of Woodbury county by one Rent, treasurer of tbe county, under section 859 of tbe Code. He entered upon and discharged the duties of bis office, and has been paid tbe five per cent allowed by statute on tbe amount collected.

Action to recover dower in certain real estate. Tire defendants answered, averring certain facts which it was claimed estopped the plaintiff from asserting any interest in the land. There was a demurrer to the’ answer, which was overruled. Thereupon the plaintiff filed a reply in which issue was taken upon some of the allegations of the answer. There was a trial upon the merits, and a decree dismissing the petition. Plaintiff appeals.

<p>1. Practice: new trial: defense to application for. Section 3268 of the Code does not contemplate a trial upon an application for a new trial made under its provisions, and it is not error to refuse to permit a party to answer and controvert such application.</p> <p>2. Swamp Lands: proof of selection: evidence. The authority of agents appointed by the cohnty court, under section 927 of the Revision, to select swamp lands should appear by the records of the court; where such authority appeared only by the affidavit of a former county judge, made and attached to the list subsequent to the selection, and it did not appear that the list had ever been forwarded to and approved by the surveyor-general, or the land department of the United States, it was held incompetent as evidence of title in the county.</p>

This is an action for the recovery of damages for selling intoxicating liquors to the plaintiff’s husband, causing his intoxication, and injuring the plaintiff in her means of support. The action is brought under sections 1556 and 1557 of the Code There was a jury trial, and a verdict and judgment for the plaintiff for $6,000. The defendants appeal.

<p>1 Evidence: telegraphic messages: production of. The parties to telegraphic messages have the right to them use to prove contracts made thereby, and an operator having them in his possession may be required by a court to produce them as evidence. Section 1328 of the Code does not apply to the use of messages as evidence.</p> <p>2. -: contract: delay in performance. Evidence excusing delay in performance is not admissible in support of an action to recover on a contract which was to be performed “immediately ” by the plaintiff.</p> <p>3’ -: —--: custom. Proof that a certain mixed lot of potatoes, where the predominant bind was Early Rose potatoes, would be called Early Rose potatoes by potato dealers, will not authorize the filling of a contract for Early Rose potatoes with those so mixed.</p>

The plaintiff avers in bis petition that be sold and conveyed to tbe defendant certain land for tbe agreed price of $1,650, and for one-balf of wbat tbe defendant should realize above that sum in case of the sale of tbe land by him for a larger amount. lie also avers that tbe defendant has sold the land, and has received therefor, in advance of the sum of $1,650, the sum of $425 and twenty-five shares of stock of tbe value of $2,500; that he has demanded of tbe defendant…

<p>1. Res Adjudieata: defendant served by publication. Where a defendant, served by pubhcatdon only, and who does not appear, fails to apply for a new trial after being served with a copy of the judgment, such judgment becomes binding upon him as an adjudication of all questions properly involved in the action.</p>

The plaintiff is a creditor of an association of persons who did business together under the name of The Co-operative Store of Morning Sun and Yicinity. The defendants were members of the association. The plaintiff recovered'a judgment upon his claim against the association, and collected a portion of it.

Action in chancery. A demurrer to the petition was sustained. Plaintiff appeals. The facts of the case are stated in the opinion.

Ajyjoeal from Story District Gowrt. The petition states the plaintiffs executed a mortgage to the defendant which has been fully paid, and the defendant refuses to satisfy same of record, although he has been requested to do so. It is sought to recover the statutory damages in such cases provided. The defendant denied the allegations of the petition, and pleaded a eoimter-claim wherein he sought to foreclose the mortgage.

Tiie plaintiff is the wife of the defendant George E. Crum, who was the owner of a farm of 120 acres, incumbered to the extent of about $1,600. On the 27th of May, 1878, the said parties executed and delivered to the defendant L. Y. Crum a warranty deed for said land. Afterward the said L. Y. Crum conveyed said premises by deed to the defendant Erank Crum.

Action to recover compensation as deputy county treasurer. Trial by jury; verdict and judgment for tbe plaintiff. Defendant appeals.

Action to recover for personal injuries sustained by plaintiff, while in the employment of defendant as a switchman, by reason of being thrown fr.ora a car operated upon defend- ' ant’s railroad, through the negligence of his co-employes. There was a verdict and judgment for plaintiff in the sum of $4,000. Defendant appeals.

Action to quiet title to lot 3 in block 10 of Bayliss’ First Addition to the city of Council Bluffs. The plaintiff avers that he holds the fee title to the lot, and has the right to the immediate possession thereof, by virtue of a tax deed. The defendant, Sapp, for answer avers that' he holds a mortgage upon the property executed prior to the execution of the tax deed.

On tbe 6tli day of June, 1877, the plaintiffs recovered a judgment of $279.38, in the Johnson District Court, against Theodore Pearson and Alexander Pearson, who were residents of Cedar county. The judgment drew interest at the rate of ten per cent per annum. August 16, 1877, plaintiffs caused an execution to issue upon said judgment to the sheriff of Cedar county.

This is an action upon an alleged breach of the covenants of seizin in -a conveyance of certain real estate. The answer alleges that at the date of the deed from the defendants to plaintiff they were the unqualified owners of the premises described, and that plaintiff, since the date of the deed, has been in the actual and undisturbed possession of the premises described. The cause was tried to the court.

On the 20th day of July, 1875, the plaintiff filed his petition, by his nest friend, alleging, in substance, that on or about the 24th of March, 1875, being a minor, he entered into a parol contract with the defendant for the purchase of certain trees and shrubbery for the price of five hundred dollars, which he then paid; that the fact of plaintiff’s minority was known to defendant; that on or about the 29th day of March, 1875, the plaintiff disaffirmed the contract and…

The petition in this case alleges that the plaintiff is the absolute and unqualified owner of a lot in the City of Oskaloosa, that the defendant makes some claim adverse to the estate of plaintiff, and that the defendant has no interest in, nor lien upon, said real estate for unpaid taxes nor anything else. The plaintiff prays a decree barring tbe defendant from having or claiming any title to said premises, or any lien for taxes or anything else.

The defendant was prosecuted and convicted upon an information charging him with the violation of an ordinance of the incorporated town of Olin. ITe appealed to the District Court, where another trial was had, and he was again convicted, and he now appeals to this court.

Ti-ie plaintiff brings this action to recover of the defendants damages for the unlawful sale of intoxicating liquors to the husband of plaintiff. The cause was tried to a jury, and on the 23d day of April they returned a verdict for the plaintiff for $550.

It is claimed by the plaintiff that certain real estate belonging to the defendants was sold for the non-payment of taxes and assessments levied by the city of Council Bluffs. The city is incorporated under special charter. The sale was made by the marshal of the city and a certificate describing tlie premises sold executed by the marshal to the purchaser, to whom a deed was executed by the mayor of the city.

The defendants constitute the board of directors of the district township of Brighton, and the relief asked in the petition was that a writ of certiorari issue commanding them to certify to the Circuit Court certain proceedings of said board, to the end certain illegal acts of the board might be corrected. The writ issued, and at the final hearing the relief asked was granted. The defendants appeal.

Appeal from Harrrison District Court The defendant was convicted of the crime of bigamy. Judgment having been rendered upon the verdict, he appeals.

Both parties claim under Geo. W. J ones. The plaintiff under a conveyance from him, and the defendant under a sheriff’s deed made in pursuance of a sale under an execution against Jones. Judgment for the defendant and the plaintiff appeals.

Tiie petition in substance states that on November 30th,. 1878, the defendant Joshua Burr, being indebted to the plaintiff in the sum of $1,198.05, and insolvent, executed and delivered in writing a general assignment for the benefit of his creditors, contained in three separate instruments, being a chattel mortgage to John Ruch, a chattel mortgage to' Mary R. Burr, and an assignment, subject to these two chattel mortgages, to Charles M. Waterman for the benefit of all his…

On the 8th day of November, 1878, the plaintiff filed in the office of the clerk of the Circuit Court a claim against the defendant, upon a promissory note executed by Milton Chamberlain, at Fremont, Nebraska, April 4, 1870, payable six months after date. The defendant, for answer, alleged that the cause of aqtion was barred by the statute of limitations of the State of Nebraska.

.Appeal from Lwvn District Court. Action to recover thirty-one dollars and eighty cents as fees due plaintiff as district attorney on fines and judgments collected. Defendant denies the collection-by plaintiff. Judgment for plaintiff; defendant appeals.

The plaintiff entered into a contract with the defendant whereby the defendant, in consideration of certain real estate to be conveyed to him, was to convey certain real estate to the plaintiff. The action is brought to compel the defendant to perform his contract specifically.

The plaintiff and the defendant are the owners of a farm of 160 acres, which is incumbered by a mortgage of $2,000.

Tns plaintiff claims that certain real estate was purchased hy the defendants Shoemakers at a tax sale, and that he lias a right to redeem the same, and that his right to do so has been denied by the comity auditor. This action was brought to enforce such right. Decree for the plaintiff and defendants appeal.

Action to foreclose a mortgage. It appears from the pleadings and evidence in the case that the defendants Henry Lembeclc and Henry Hanover were the owners of part of a lot in the city of Dubuque. They executed a mortgage thereon to the plaintiff, and another mortgage to the defendant Kauffman. The defendant Joseph Lembeclc, administrator, also held a mortgage upon the premises.

Action at law to recover of defendant upon his subscription to the stock of Lamar Insurance Company.. A demurrer to the petition was sustained, and, plaintiff electing to stand upon the petition, judgment was rendered for defendant. Plaintiff appeals.

Upon the petition of plaintiff a temporary injunction was ■ allowed by the Hon. G. W. Ruddick, judge of the 12th Judicial District, restraining defendant Black from receiving, and tbe other defendant, Hanchett, sheriff of Bremer county, from executing, a sheriff’s deed under an execution sale made upon a judgment in favor of Black, and against certain defendants whose names appear in the opinion.

This is an action to quiet title to real estate. The petition alleges that the plaintiff has been in the actual possession of the property described for more than ten years, under color of title and claim of right. The defendant disclaims any interest in or right to the property except the contingent right of dower as the husband of Margaret Hazlett, a grantor in the chain of title under which the plaintiff claims.

Indictment charging the seduction of a woman of previously chaste character. Trial by jury, verdict guilty; and judgment. The defendant appeals. ,

<p>1. Landlord and Tenant: lease: payment op rent. A lessee of one of two claimants to land, who is put in possession by his lessor and pays him the rent, cannot be held liable- therefor to the other claimant, although, he has notice of the latter’s claim, which claim is afterward established in the courts.</p>

This is an action in equity to foreclose the defendant’s equity of redemption in certain real estate. The court found that the defendant was entitled to redeem upon payment of $603.13, and the costs of suit, and decreed that upon the failure to pay said sum within thirty days from the date of the decree his equity of redemption be barred. The defendant appeals. The facts are stated in the opinion.

<p> Appeal from. Harrison CirovAt Court. </p> <p>This is an action against James Myers upon four promissory notes, each for the snin of $110, and to foreclose a mortgage executed to secure the same. The intervenor, Foster, claims a lien paramount to the mortgage upon a portion of the mortgaged property. The court rendered judgment against James Myers upon the notes, and foreclosed the mortgage, but adjudged the lien of the intervenor upon the building situated upon a portion of the mortgaged property to be superior to that of the plaintiff under the mortgage. From this portion of the decree the plaintiff appeals.</p> <p>The facts are stated in the opinion.</p>

The intervenor, the Mason & ITamlin Organ Co., doing business at Chicago, Illinois, sold on credit and shipped to the defendant Peck, at Waverly, Iowa, two organs. The shipment was made by the Illinois Central Railroad. The organs arrived at Waverly in the latter part of December, 1879. They were unloaded from the car in which they were shipped, and stored in the depot of said railroad company at Waverly, where they remained, tbe freight thereon being unpaid.

The plaintiffs sued out an attachment against H. C. Peck, which on the 31 st day of December, 1879, was levied on certain personal property said to belong to Peck. Among such property was “one Sohmer. & Co. piano.” Afterward, on February 3, 1880, the Bank of 'Waverly intervened in the action, and claimed all or a portion of the property levied on under a 'chattel mortgage.

Action to quiet the title to and recover the possession of certain lands. Upon the application, of plaintiff a receiver was appointed to collect rents and apply the proceeds thereof to the payment of taxes and incumbrances. From the final decree, settling the receiver’s account, the plaintiff and the receiver appeal. The facts of the case appear in the opinion.

This action was commenced at law on the 6th day of December, 1876, for the possession of certain real estate. The defendants, amongst other defenses, relied upon the statute of limitations. The cause was by stipulation transferred to the equity docket. The court found that the plaintiff is the absolute owner of the property in controversy, and entitled to the possession thereof. The defendants appeal. The facts are stated in the opinion.

The defendant M. A. Putney commenced an action in the Fremont District-Court by filing her petition therein on the 7th day of August, 1877, in which she claimed damages against one Wilson and one Quigiy for the unlawful sale of intoxicating liquors to her husband. October 5,1877, judgment was rendered .against Qu’igly in the Fremont District Court.

Action in chancery. There was a decree dismissing plaintiff’s petition and granting the relief prayed for by defendant, D. E. Eees, in his cross-bill. From the decree dismissing plaintiff’s petition he appeals.

The defendant was tried and convicted of arson, the charge being that he set fire to and burned a two-story frame building in the night-time, which building was owned and occupied as a dwelling-house by one Farnsworth. Defendant appeals.

A default and judgment was rendered against the defendant as garnishee, because he failed to appear when notified to do so, and answer touching his indebtedness to one Rosenaw, and the same having been set aside the plaintiff appeals.

Martin Mehan was in the employ of the defendant as a section hand. On the morning of the 13th of January, 1879, he and another section hand, named Dermoddy, went some thirty feet from the ground to the platform of a winch mill of the defendant, which was used for pumping water to supply defendant’s engines at Atlantic.

On the 2d day of August, 1878, James Jamison, by his next friend O. E. Raüsier, commenced an action to cancel three notes aggregating the sum of $2,060, and a mortgage securing them, and a deed to a certain house and lot in the city of Independence, all executed by James Jamison to the defendant. The petition alleges that they were all procured by fraud, and without consideration.

The petition states the plaintiff was married to Alfred McDaniel in 1825, and that he died in 1877. During his lifetime Alfred McDaniel owned in fee simple out-lot number' 704a in the city of Dubuque, and that upon the death of said Alfred the plaintiff became seized in fee simple of the one-third part of said out-lot as her dower; that the defendants are in possession of said lot and claim to own the same.

<p> Appeal from Dubuque District Court. </p> <p>Action in equity to establish a mechanic’s lien. J"udgment for the plaintiff and defendant appeals.</p>

The petition stated the plaintiff and defendant owned a threshing machine in partnership, and during the year 1877 were engaged in threshing grain; that there was an unsettled account between them growing out of said partnership business, on which there was. due plaintiff $150, for which judgment was asked.

<p> Appeal from ATlamalcee District Gourt. </p> <p>The defendant, Frank Lucas, was indicted jointly with Charles Wood and James White, for a robbery from the person of R. G-. Edwards, perpetrated by assaulting and wounding him with deadly weapons. The defendant was tried, convicted, sentenced and committed to the penitentiary for twelve years. He appeals.</p>

Action on a policy of insurance against loss by fire. The property insured consisted of a dwelling-house and household furniture, provisions and wearing apparel therein, “ grain in stacks and granary on farm,” and horses on “ farm and commons.” The property destroyed by fire consisted of one hundred and fifty bushels of unthreshed flax in stack on the farm.

No witness testifies as to bow tbe accident occurred, but the evidence shows sufficiently that the deceased must have fallen from the ears while in motion. The accident occurred near where a coal platform had been erected very near to the track. The plaintiff’s theory is that the deceased was knocked from the cars by tbe platform, and she avers that the defendant was guilty of negligence in erecting the platform so near the track.

The defendant became indebted to one Kennedy in the sum of $45.00, for work and labor. Kennedy assigned his claim, to the plaintiff. The action is brought to'recover upon it. Eor answer the defendant avers that it was garnished for the same debt in the State of Minnesota, in an action brought before a justice of the peace against Kennedy; that judgment was rendered against this defendant as garnishee in the sum of $24.00, which amount defendant paid on said judgment.

Action by plaintiff to recover for her own seduction. There was a verdict and judgment for plaintiff in the sum of $2,500. Defendant appeals.

Appeal from IA/rm District Gov/rt Plaintiff claims a mare belonging to him was greatly injured by a train on defendant’s road, and this action was brought to recover damages therefor. Trial by jury. Verdict and judgment for the plaintiff, and defendant appeals.

The defendant was indicted for a nuisance; the charge being that at his drug store, ip the city of Cedar Falls, he kept for sale, and sold, certain intoxicating liquors contrary to law. ’ A trial was had, and the defendant was found guilty, and he appeals.

Maria Sullivan was the owner of certain real estate in the city of Marengo. She died in the year 1876 intestate, without issue, and leaving surviving her Patrick Sullivan, her husband. Mary Gill filed her petition as plaintiff herein, claiming to be a sister of said Maria Sullivan. She named Mark- Maloney and Ann Welsh as defendants, and alleged that they were brother and sister of the intestate. No service of an original notice was h§d upon either of said parties.

Action in chancery to quiet the title to certain lands, and recover possession, thereof. Defendants among other defenses set up a claim for improvements made by them and their grantors upon the lands. By the decree of the court defendants’ claim for improvements were set off against plaintiff’s claim for tlie rents and profits, the court holding that the claims of the respective parties were equal. Defendants appeal.

Appeal'from Benton Circuit Court. This is an action in equity, the object of which is to subject certain i’eal estate to the payment of judgments held by the plaintiffs against the defendant, John F. Pyne, upon the alleged ground that a conveyance of said real estate by said Pyne to certain of the other defendants was in fraud of the rights of the plaintiffs, as his creditors. There was a trial upon the the merits and a decree for the plaintiffs.

The plaintiff is executor of the will of R. W. Sypher, deceased. As such executor he filed a petition in the Circuit Court of Polk county for an order for the sale of real estate to pay the debts of the estate. The defendant, Matilda II. Sypher, widow of R. W. Sypher, deceased, claims a distributive share of the real estate, and in case of sale a distributive share of the proceeds.

Action upon a promissory note. A demurrer to tbe petition was overruled, and, defendant electing to stand upon bis demurrer, judgment was rendered for plaintiffs; defendant appeals. Tbe further facts of tbe case appear in the opinion.

Indictment fqf willful trespass. The jury returned a verdict of guilty, and judgment was rendered thereon. The defendants appeal.

This is an action at law in which the plaintiff, being publisher of a newspaper, seeks to recover of the defendant Farr, as sheriff, and of the other defendants as sureties on his official bond, certain printer’s fees for publishing a large number of sheriff’s sale notices, which fees, it is alleged, said Farr collected and appropriated to his own use. A jury was waived and a trial was had to the court.

It is averred in the petition that in the year 1873 J. IT. Walliker was elected sheriff of Clinton county, and that on the 18th day of December, 1873, he duly qualified, and executed unto said county his official bond, with the defendants as his sureties; that about the 18th of December, 1874, the plaintiffs herein commenced an action by attachment against one Parkinson, and the writ of attachment was duly issued and delivered to said Walliker, who levied the same upon…

The plaintiff and the defendants entered into a written contract, of which the following is a copy: “ This agreement, made and entered into this 26th day of September,-1876, by and between Geo. Taft and A. C. Tiede & Co., both parties of Elkport, witnesseth: This agreement is made for the following purposes: The above Geo.

Action upon a judgment rendered by a justice of the peace in the State of Pennsylvania. There was a verdict and judgment for plaintiff. Defendant appeals. The facts of the case, involved in the question decided, appear in the opinion.

The petition alleges that the defendant McCord filed before the defendant Stuver an information charging the plaintiff with keeping for sale beer contrary to the terms of an ordinance of the city of Newton, and praying the issuance of a search and seizure warrant to “ take any beer that might be found in the possession of the plaintiff, as by said ordinance provided”; that the defendant Stuver, as an acting justice, issued such warrant; that the defendant McCord, as the…

Appeal from Grwndy Qvrewit Oourt. Action to foreclose a mortgage. There was a decree granting the relief prayed for in the petition. Defendant appeals.

Action for mandamus. The plaintiffs aver in their petition in substance that they are residents of Independent School District No. 4, in Cedar township, Johnson county; that the… Held: and arrangements were partially made for making the change, but that the board of directors of District No. 4 now refuse to act in the matter, wherefore they pray for a writ of mandamus to compel them to act. To the plaintiffs’ petition showing the above facts the defendants demurred.

Action by plaintiff as widow of J. D. McGlothlen, deceased, intestate, to obtain an assignment of her distributive share in the land belonging to his estate. The heirs of the intestate and administrator are made defendants. The land in question consists of section twenty-seven, in township seventy-eight, range twenty-three west. The north-west one-fourth of the southwest one-fourth was occupied by the plaintiff as her homestead.

These actions were commenced in Pocahontas Circuit Court, to quiet the title of the plaintiff to some 103,0 acres of land situated in that county. Afterward by agreement of tbe pai’ties tbe place of trial was changed to tbe Tama Circuit Court. Issue was taken upon, tbe allegations ■ of the-petition, and trials were bad upon written evidence.

This action was brought originally before a justice of the peace of Eapids township, Linn county. Judgment having been rendered for the defendant, the plaintiff appealed to the Circuit Court of Linn county. In the Circuit Court the defendant filed a motion to dismiss on the ground that the Circuit Court had no jurisdiction. The court sustained the motion, and from the ruling the plaintiff appeals.

Action of replevin for a liorse. There was a verdict and judgment for defendant. . Plaintiff appeals. The facts of the case involved in the points decided appear in the opinion.

Action of replevin. A verdict was returned for the plaintiffs for all of the property claimed' in the petition. The plaintiffs ñled a remitter as to two calves in the petition claimed. Judgment was rendered in favor of the plaintiffs for the remainder of the property in controversy. The defendants appeal. The facts are stated in the opinion.

Appeal from Superior Oourt of Oedar Rapids. Action at law. There was a judgment for plaintiff. Defendant appeals. The facts of the case appear in the opinion.

<p> Appeal from Jifferson District Gowt. </p> <p>Tiie facts are' stated in the opinion.</p>

Action for an injunction to prevent the defendant from taking possession of a certain horse. Each party holds a chattel mortgage upon the horse. The question presented is as to which is paramount. The plaintiff’s mortgage was executed and recorded first, but the defendant claims that his mortgage is paramount, for the reason that he had no notice of the plaintiff’s mortgage neither actual nor constructive.

Action to foreclose three several mortgages. An answer and cross-petition was filed, and it was pleaded therein: First, payment; Second, that there was no consideration for one of the mortgages; and, Third, that all were tainted with usury. There was a reference, and the referee found against the defendants as to all the defenses.

Writ of error to a justice of the peace of the city of Cedar' Rapids. A motion to dismiss the writ on the ground that the court has no jurisdiction, the Superior Court of the city of Cedar Rapids having exclusive jurisdiction of the case, was sustained. Plaintiff appeals.

A paper purporting to be the last will and testament of Joseph Dye, deceased, was presented to the Linn Circuit Court for probate. Mary A. Logan and Lucinda D. Young, children, and Warren H. Smith, a grand-child, of Joseph Dye, objected to the admission of the instrument to probate, on the ground that it was procured by undue influence of interested persons, and that Joseph Dye, at the time of the execution of the instrument, was not ef sound mind and memory.

The plaintiff is a copartnership doing business as live stock commission merchants, at Union Stock Tards, Illinois. The defendants were partners doing business in buying and shipping live stock in Story county, Iowa. On the 25th of March, 1880, the plaintiffs filed their verified petition, claiming of the defendants a balance due as upon account.

The petition of the plaintiff alleges, in substance, that one James Hill, being the owner of an undivided one-fourth of certain letters patent, on the 26th day of July, 1876, conveyed, by absolute deed, said interest to the defendant to secure the sum of $150; that defendant has received from the sale and manufacture of patented articles an amount more than sufficient to pay all the indebtedness of Hill to him, and now holds said patents without any right or interest…

The object of this action is to obtain a writ of mcmdcmmis to compel the defendant, as sheriff, to execute to the plaintiff a conveyance of certain real estate sold by him on execution. There was a demurrer to the answer, which was sustained, and, the defendant electing to stand thereon, there was a decree granting the plaintiff the relief ashed, and the defendant appeals.

This action is brought to recover the amount of two promissory notes, each for the sum of $2,250, and to foreclose a mortgage executed to secure them.

Action upon a bail bond executed by defendant for the appearance of one who had been held by a justice of the peace to appear and answer at the District Court upon a charge of manslaughter. There was a judgment for plaintiff. Defendant appeals.

Action to recover damages, caused, as the plaintiff claims, by a train on defendant’s road striking and injuring a horse belonging to the plaintiff. Trial by jury; verdict and judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals.

Action to recover specific personal property. The defendant recovered a judgment against W. H. Hills et al., and it was claimed by the defendant that the plaintiff Maynes executed a bond staying execution on said judgment. An execution was issued after the expiration of the time execution was stayed, and property belonging to the plaintiff levied on and taken into his possession by the sheriff. This action is brought to recover said property.

Ajpjpeal from Lucas District Court. Action by a subcontractor to enforce a mechanic’s lien for work done in grading a portion of a railroad belonging to the defendant, the Chariton, Des Moines & Southern Eailway Co. The petition shows that the plaintiff was a subcontractor under the defendants Ford & Co.;. that the work for which the lien is claimed was done in the months of September, October and November, 1878; that a verified statement of the work done was filed with the…

The defendant was indicted for cheating by false pretenses. The indictment was in two counts. In the first count it was charged that the defendant falsely pretended to one Addison that he, the defendant, was the agent of the firm of.n. & R. I>.

TnE plaintiff brings this action to recover $504 for the alleged negligently setting fire to the prairie and permitting it to escape, thereby burning one hundred and sixty-eight tons of hay, of which the plaintiff alleges he was the owner. The answer, amongst other things, denies that plaintiff was the owner of any of the hay alleged to have been burned. The trial was to a jury and resulted in a verdict for plaintiff for $270. The defendant appeals.

This is an action of replevin of certain personal property of the alleged value of $593.00. The cause was tried to a jury, and verdict and judgment were rendered for the defendants. The plaintiffs apjieal. The facts are stated in the opinion.

Action at law against the indorser of a promissory note. Defendant set up an equitable defense, and the relief prayed foru therein was granted him by the decree of the Circuit Court. Plaintiff appeals.

This is an action to recover for materials furnished and labor done for II. N. Woods & Son, contractors, and to enforce against the State Insurance Company a subcontractor’s mechanic’s lien. The court rendered judgment against H. N.' Woods ■& Son for. $163, and established a lien against the State Insurance Company to the extent of $29.18. The plaintiffs appeal.

TnE defendant was convicted of the crime of selling to one George Ward intoxicating liquor known as whisky, without a permit. Having been sentenced to paya fine of $20, he appeals from the judgment.

The plaintiff is a widow, and the surviving parent of one Silas Benton, who was killed by being run over by one of the defendant’s trains. The deceased at the time of bis death was about eleven years of age. The evidence shows that he, with several other boys of about his age, entered an empty freight car which constituted one of a train which had been made up at the town of Brooklyn. The train when the boys entered the car ivas about ready to start.

Action in chancery to set aside a sale of land to plaintiff on an execution issued upon a decree of foreclosure in favor of plaintiff and against defendants. The relief is asked upon the ground that the execution, through the mistake of the clerk, did not cover all the lands described by the decree, and .the sum bid at the sale was the full amount of the decree, the plaintiffs believing that all the land covered by the decree was described in the execution.

Affeal from Linn District Court. The plaintiff presented its petition to the judge of the Linn District Court praying for an injunction to restrain the defendants from constructing a railroad, to be operated by horse power and steam power, upon and along a public highway between Cedar Eapids and Marion.

This action is brought to recover the amount of two promissory notes executed by C. H. Kentner, and to foreclose a mortgage made to secure them. The defendants admit the execution of the notes and mortgage, but allege that the notes have been paid. The cause was tried to the court, and the plaintiffs’ petition was dismissed. The plaintiffs appeal. The facts are stated in the opinion.

Action in chancery to restrain tbe sale upon execution of certain real estate, on tbe ground tbat it is exempt as a bomestead. There was a decree granting the relief prayed for in the petition. Defendants appeal. The facts of the case are stated in the petition.

The defendant was charged with the crime of willfully and maliciously burning a certain barn in the night time. Upon a trial he was convicted and sentenced to imprisonment in the penitentiary for the period of ten years. Defendant appeals. *

Th$ plaintiffs bring this action for the possession of six horses, three sets double harness, three delivery wagons, and certain promissory notes, checks, written obligations, and all books of account and accounts therein stated owing to one Eobert W. Pool. The plaintiffs base their claim to said property upon two bills of sale executed by Eobert W. Pool.

Action to quiet the title to forty acres of land. There was a decree for the plaintiff. Defendant appeals. The facts appear in the opinion.

The defendant was indicted for the'crime of larceny in stealing an overcoat of the alleged value of thirty-five dollars. He pleaded he had been convicted for the larceny of the same overcoat before a justice of the peace, and punished therefor. To this plea the State demurred, on the grounds: First, that the former conviction being for a minor offense cannot be pleaded in bar of the offense charged in the indictment:.

Appeal from Linn Circuit Court. Replevin for a stock of stoves, hardware, etc. There was a verdict and judgment for defendants. Plaintiff appeals.

This action is brought to recover the amount of a bond executed by the defendant to the plaintiff for $500, with' interest at the rate of nine per cent, payable semi-annually, and to foreclose a mortgage executed to secure said bond. The defendant answered, alleging that the bond and mortgage were procured by fraud, and are without consideration. The cause was tried to the court, and a decree was entered dismissing the plaintiff’s petition. The plaintiff appeals.

Appeal from Pavis Circuit Court. Action on a contract of guaranty. There was a verdict and judgment for the defendants. The plaintiff appeals.

The plaintiff contracted to build a pier and the abutments for a bridge for Linn county, and to discharge all mechanic’s liens which might attach in the building thereof. This work the plaintiff sublet to the defendant Wickham, and a written contract was entered into between the plaintiff and Wickham whereby the latter agreed to do the work according to tlio plans and specifications attached to and made a part of the contract between the county and the plaintiff.

Action upon an account for certáin goods sold to the defendant. The suit was commenced before a justice of the peace, where a trial was had which resulted in a judgment for the defendant. An appeal was taken to the Circuit Court, where there was a trial by jury and a verdict and judgment for the defendant. Plaintiffs appeal.

The plaintiffs are tlie owners of certain real estate in the city of Clinton. The same was assessed for the purpose of taxation at the value of ten thousand dollars. The board of •equalization increased such valuation to twelve thousand dollars. Afterward the plaintiffs appeared before the board and asked that it he reduced to seven thousand. This was refused, and the value finally fixed by the board at eleven thousand dollars.

Action for an injunction to restrain the collection of certain taxes. The plaintiffs are tax-payers of Waukonsa township, Webster county. The defendant is treasurer of the county. In 1877 the taxes in question were voted by the electors of said township to aid the Eort Dodge & Fort Ridgely Railroad and Telegraph Company.

This is an action to recover the amount of two promissory notes executed to the plaintiff by the defendant, John D. Wolf, and for the foreclosure of mortgages executed to secure them. One of said notes is for the sum of $6,000, and is dated April 5th, 1872; the other of said notes is for the sum of $3,500, and is dated January 27 th, 1876. Both notes bear interest át tbe rate of ten per cent per annum.

Appecvl from Dubuque Circuit Court. This case was bronglit to the Circuit Court by an appeal of plaintiff from the action of the board of equalization of taxes of Julien township, Dubuque county, in refusing to reduce tbo valuation of the railroad bridge across the Mississippi river, owned by plaintiff, and in increasing such valuation. Upon a trial in the Circuit Court the assessment, and valuation of the bridge were reduced. Defendant appeals.

This is an action to recover the sum of $67, which, it is alleged the defendants, as directors and treasurer of the plaintiff, paid to the defendant Sudbrock, from the contingent fund of the plaintiff, on a protended claim against plaintiff for labor and expenses incurred by endeavoring to secure the establishment of a public highway leading to the school-lnjuse of plaintiff.

This is an action upon a bond executed by the defendants for the faithful discharge of the duties of the defendant, E. W. Holway, as the agent of plaintiff at Cresco, to solicit risks for fire insurance, deliver policies, and collect premiums. The cause was tried upon the issue joined between the plaintiff and the defendant Upton. The trial resulted in a verdict and judgment for the defendant. The plaintiff appeals. The facts are stated in the opinion.

This is an action to recover tbe value of a grain elevator, and certain grain and other property which it is alleged were destroyed by fire, set out by defendant in operating its railroad.

Appeal from Des Ifoi/nes District Gov/rt. . Action at law. Trial by the court, judgment for the plain tiff, and defendant appeals

The defendant was the publisher of a newspaper which, in one of its issues, contained a communication charging the plaintiff with knowingly selling diseased beef. The answer admitted the publication, and justified it by alleging that it was true. Certain mitigating circumstances were also alleged. The case was commenced in the Tama District Court, where a trial was had, which resulted in a verdict for the plaintiff.

Action upon a policy of insurance. There was a Yerdiet and judgment for plaintiff; defendant appeals. The facts of the case are stated in the opinion.

This action is brought upon a note for the sum of $36.90, executed by tbe president and secretary of tbe district township of Willow, and tbe subdirector of subdistrict number 4, in said district township, for a policy of insurance issued by plaintiff upon a school-house and furniture therein, in said subdistrict.

Action for slander. There was a verdict and judgment for defendant. Plaintiff appeals. The facts of the case appear in the opinion.

Action to recover an alleged balance of a deposit account. The plaintiff avers that on the 9th day of January, 1879, there was due her from the defendant the sum of $190, which the defendant refuses to pay.

• Plaintiff presented to the .Circuit Court, sitting as a court of probate, a claim against the estate of the defendant as administrator. The case was sent to a referee, and upon his report coming in judgment was rendered for defendant. Plaintiff appeals.

Action in chancery to set aside a deed of certain lands, executed by plaintiff to defendant Lewis, on the ground that it was procured by fraud. Hardin made default, and*upon a trial on the merits a decree,was rendered granting the relief prayed for in the petition. Defendant Lewis appeals.

Action of replevin to recover possession of a sewing-machine. It appears from the averments of the petition, and from a written contract which is exhibited with and made a part of the petition, that plaintiff received from the defendants the sewing-machine in question, upon which he paid eighteen dollars, and promised to pay the sums of five dollars and seven dollars, at stated times.

Appé&l from Winnebago Circuit Court. Action upon a replevin bond. The defendants appeal from an order striking from the files their answer to the petition. The facts of the case appear in the opinion.

The defendant was indicted for murder in tbe second degree, committed, as is alleged, upon One Mary Rayer, whilst pretending to cure her of some disease. The defendant was convicted of manslaughter, fined $100, and sentenced to the penitentiary for one year. Tie appeals.

■Appeal from Marshall Circuit Court In this action the plaintiffs, J. M. Adams & Co., a partnership composed of J. M. Adams and M. II. White, replevied certain horses, harnesses, wagons, and other personal property used by them as a partnership engaged in the business of draying. The defendant, as sheriff of Marshall county, held the property under an execution, issued upon a judgment against Adams alone.

On the 7th day of January, 1879, the plaintiff commenced an action, aided by attachment, against George Blake, before Uarvey Potter, a justice of the peace, upon a promissory note, and caused original notice to be served upon George Blake, returnable on the 13th day of January. The attachment was served by garnishment of one Patrick McCarney, and by levy upon certain personal property.

The appellants, as proponents, sought to have what purported to be the will of Peter Bomgardner admitted to probate. The appellee, as contestant, objected thereto on the ground the said Peter was not of sound mind at the time the will was executed. Trial by jury, verdict and judgment lor contestant, and the plaintiffs appeal.

. Action in equity. The relief sought was to restrain a9 nuisance. An injunction was granted, which the defendants í moved to dissolve, and the same being overruled, they appeal.:

Action to recover certain fees collected by defendant, W. G. Hillis, as'police judge of the city of Des Moines, in cases prosecuted before him for offenses against the statutes of the State. A demurrer to defendants’answer was sustained; they now appeal to this court.

ActioIn in equity to subject certain personal property to the payment of a judgment held by the plaintiff against the defendant M. G-. Royer. Margaret J. Royer, wife of M. G. Royer, and George Beed are made defendants as claiming some interest in the property. The property consists of certain grain grown upon a farm leased by George Beed to Mrs. Royer.

Apjpeal from Tama District Court. Action on a school order drawn by defendant upon its treasurer, payable to the plaintiff. Judgment for the plaintiff and the defendant appeals.

The plaintiff filed ber petition in substance alleging that in February, 1880, sbe entered into a written contract witli tbe defendants, Ormsby Bros. & Go., to sell for ber tbe N. E. ¿ of 4, 97, 33, of wliicb plaintiff was tbe owner; that said defendants sold said land for plaintiff, and of tbe proceeds thereof, after deducting their commission, they still bold tbe sum of $640, and have so held tbe same since prior to May 1st, 1880, and that they refuse to pay tbe same to…

Action in equity. Certain paragraphs in the amended petition were stricken out on motion, on the ground the allegations therein were immaterial and irrelevant. From the order of the court the plaintiff appeals.

Action to set aside a judgment and execution sale made thereon.

<p> Appeal from Boone District Gov/rt. </p> <p>The plaintiff brings this action to recover for injuries received while working as a miner in defendant’s coal mine. Ho alleges that the defendant was negligent in failing to support the roof of the entry where he was at work. The trial was to a jury and resulted in a verdict and judgment for the plaintiff in the sum of $800. The defendant appeals.</p>

Ajpfeal from Buena Vista Gi/reuit Cowt. This is an action of replevin and the amount in controversy is less than $100. There was a trial by jury. There was no conflict in the evidence. The court instructed the jury to return a verdict for the plaintiff. Defendant appeals.

Appeal from Dcwis Circuit Court. Action in chancery. There was a decree granting the relief prayed for by the plaintiff ¡-'defendants appeal.

O. Blanchard, J%idge of Sixth Judicial District of Iowa. The 'plaintiff, Foster, applied for and obtained a writ of habeas corpus.

The plaintiff claims that in the year 1871 he entered into a contract to labor for the defendants, at their stone quarry at Earlham, Iowa; that he required a house for his occupancy, and that-he and the defendants agreed that plaintiff should build a house on defendants’ land at his'own cost and expense, and use and occupy the same, and that whenever the plaintiff should thereafter quit the employment of the defendants, and the possession of the building, the defendants…

Action in equity to set aside the cancellation of one-half of a judgment, and to establish the same in plaintiff’s favor. The judgment in question was rendered against the defendant for $5,000, in the Shelby Circuit Court, in favor of one Mary Simonson, administratrix of the estate of Lars Nelson, deceased.

TnE plaintiff brings this action to redeem from a tax sale of lands in tbe petition described, and for a decree setting aside a tax deed to the defendants for said lands, and quieting the title thereto in the plaintiff. The court granted the plaintiff the relief asked, upon payment into court for the use of the defendant the sum of $13.65, and taxed the costs to the plaintiff. The defendant appeals. The facts are stated in the opinion.

S. Graham was the owner of block six in Rice’s addition to the town of Adel.

The defendants are husband and wife, and tbis action was brought to recover against both, for goods, wares and merchandise sold, on the ground the same was chargeable against both as a family expense. For tlie balance claimed to be due on one of the accounts it was alleged in the petition the defendant, Martin McCarty, had given his note. The execution, of the note was denied under oath. There was a trial by jury, judgment against both defendants, and they appeal.

Action to recover for two horses alleged to 'have been killed by defendant by reason of a want of a fence. There was a trial by jury and verdict and judgment were rendered for the plaintiff. The defendant appeals.

Action in equity to 'settle a partnership account, and also to set aside a certain administrator’s sale, and to cancel certain deeds. The defendant, E. M. Laws, and his brother, W. Y. Laws, were for several years prior to October 7,1870, partners, doing business as druggists and dealers in real estate, under the name of E. M. Laws & Bro., at Osceola, in Clarice county. On the day aforesaid W. Y. Laws died intestate.

<p> Appeal from Palo Alto District Oourt. </p> <p>Action in equity. The petition was dismissed and plaintiff appeals.</p>

This is an action upon a promissory note for the sum of $502.88, executed by Moses Bonney tó plaintiffs, dated March 15th, 1878, due twelve months after date, and to foreclose a mortgage executed to secure said note. The cause was tried to the court, and relief asked by the plaintiffs was granted. The defendants appeal.

A motion to strike out part of the petition, and a demurrer to the residue, having been sustained, the plaintiff appeals.

Action of replevin for certain cows and other cattle. The cause was submitted to the court without a jury and judgment rendered for defendant. Plaintiff appeals.

In April, 1878, the plaintiff contracted in writing with the defendant to furnish the necessary brick and materials, and erect for the defendant a two story brick dwelling house. The contract was made with reference to certain specifications prepared by Wm.

It appears from the averments of the petition that one Eandall contracted to furnish the materials and erect a court house for Story county. The plaintiff entered into a written contract with Randall to furnish the brick for said building, and after furnishing the same there was a balance due to the plaintiff amounting to $350. Plaintiff commenced an action against Randall, and on the 3d of April, 1877, he recovered judgment for the amount due.

The plaintiff alleged in her petition that she was lawfully married to William Bradford before the year 1860, and remained his wife until his death, on the 14th day of July, 1869; that during the time of their marriage William Bradford owned certain land in the petition described, and plaintiff at no time made any relinquishment of her right therein; that said land was sold under execution, on the 7th day of April, 1863.

Appeal,from Madison District Court. This is an action for tbe possession of real estate. The. defendant admits tbat tbe plaintiff is tbe owner of tbe legal title to the land described, but alleges that the plaintiff’s right of action accrued more than ten years prior to the commencement of this suit, and is barred by tbe statute of limitations. Tbe cause was tried to a jury and verdict and judgment were rendered for the defendant. The plaintiff appeals.

Appeal from Fremont Circuit Court. Action upon a promissory note. There was a verdict and judgment for defendants; plaintiff appeals.

At the October-term, 1878, of the Dallas District Court, the defendant obtained a decree of foreclosure of a mortgage upon certain real estate. The mortgage was executed by Johp D. Rivers, who afterwards conveyed the mortgaged property to H. A. Olmsted. H. A. Olmsted conveyed to Willis Olmsted. He conveyed to Charles Olmsted, and said Charles conveyed to the plaintiff, James G-. Olmsted. The original petition did not make any demand for personal judgment against James G-.

Tnis is a controversy as to the rights of the respective parties arising out of the construction and maintenance of a partnership ditch upon the line between the lands owned by the parties. The plaintiff constructed a ditch upon his own land which flowed into the partnership ditch, which defendant claimed’injured his land, and defendant entered upon plámtiff’s land and filled up said ditch and made an excavation in a dam erected by plaintiff.

Plaintiee commenced two separate actions to foreclose two mortgages securing certain promissory notes. One of the defendants did not execute one of the notes; all of them joined in the execution of the others. The same defenses were pleaded in both cases and it was agreed that the decision' of one should control the other. There was a decree for plaintiffs; defendants appeal.

Action in equity for the specific performance of a written contract for the conveyance of real estate. There was a decree for the plaintiff, and defendants appeal.

This is an action in equity to quiet the plaintiffs’ title to certain real estate. The defendant denies plaintiffs’ title, alleges title in himself, and asks that his title be quieted. The court dismissed the plaintiffs’ petition, and granted the defendant the relief prayed. The plaintiffs appeal.

<p>Kendig v. Marble, ante, 386, followed.</p>

Indictment charging that the defendant in the night time did break and enter a dwelling house with intent to commit larceny. Trial by jury; verdict guilty, and sentencing the defendant to the penitentiary for seven years. Defendant appeals.

This is an action in equity in which it is sought to charge the defendants, H. Bailey & Co., with certain liabilities as members of another partnership known as the Burlington Furniture Co. The defendants deny that they were members of said partnership, or that they were in any way hable as partners. The cause was tried before a referee, who found that the plaintiffs had no just or equitable claim against the defendants.

• The defendant was indicted for, and convicted of, the crime of burglariously breaking and entering a dwelling house in the night time, with the intent to- commit larceny. Judgment was rendered whereby he was sentenced to the penitentiary for seven years, from which judgment he appeals.

Action upon an account for meat sold by the plaintiffs and delivered to defendant Edwards. The petition avers in' substance, that it was sold both to the defendant Edwards and the1 defendant Ettier. Edwards made default; Ettier appeared and denied the allegations of the petition. ■ There was a trial by jury, and verdict and judgment were rendered for the plaintiffs. The defendant'Ettier appeals.

Appeal from Page Circuit Court. Action upon a promissory note. There was a trial by the court and a judgment for the plaintiff. Defendant appeals.

The plaintiff filed its petition in substance alleging that on the Gth day of.

Action to foreclose a mortgage, which is resisted on the ground that the defendants are husband and wife, that the mortgaged premises constituted their homestead, and Mrs. Cramer did not execute it as required by law. The decree was for the defendants, and the plaintiffs appeal.

The allegations in the petition were denied and a settlement and counter claim pleaded by the defendant. By consent the cause was referred to James D. Griffin, Esq., who reported to the court his finding of facts and conclusions of law. Exceptions thereto were filed by the defendant, which were overruled and judgment rendered as recommended by the referee. .The defendant appeals.

This action was commenced hy the plaintiff Seeberger against R. Kremling, to recover a judgment upon a certain claim for money due. The action was aided by an attachment, which was levied upon certain goods which were in the possession of H. H. Hobert. Kremling answered admitting the claim of Seeberger, and agreeing to a judgment, and consenting that the attached goods be held to satisfy the judgment.

Action of right to recover a fraction of a lot in the City of Burlington. The defendants own the east half of the west half of lots 742 and 743 in said city. The plaintiffs own the land adjacent upon the west. The parties disagree as to the boundary line between them, the plaintiffs claiming it to he twenty-six inches further east than the defendants admit it to he. The defendants are in possession of the land in controversy.

Mahor sold and conveyed to defendant eighty acres of land. To set aside such conveyance is the relief sought in this action. The ground upon which it is based is that Mrs. Mahor at the time of the conveyance was of unsound mind; that it was greatly to her disadvantage, and was obtained by undue influence. The plaintiff is guardian of the person and property of Mrs. Mahor, having been duly appointed such in 1878.