Volume 59 — Iowa Reports

<p>1. Practice: jury bound by instructions of court. The instructions to the jury constitute the law of the case, and must he followed by the jury, whether right or wrong.</p>

Action in chancery to quiet the title of certain lands in plaintiff. After the filing of the petition the defendants conveyed their interest and claim in the land to plaintiff, and Houston filed a petition of intervention showing that he is the holder of a certificate of purchase of the land at tax sale and that he is entitled to a tax deed, which the treasurer refuses to execute.

Action to recover damages sustained by reason of an assault and battery committed by defendants upon tbe plaintiff. There were a verdict and judgment for plaintiff; defendants appeal. •

Action in chancery to rescind a sale and conveyance of forty acres of land in Marshall county on account of fraudulent representations as to the title made by defendant to plaintiff. There was a decree granting the relief prayed for in the petition; defendant appeals. After the cause was brought to this court the death of Lucas was suggested and his administratrix was substituted as defendant.

The plaintiff is an incorporated town under the general incorporation law of the State. The defendant is the agent and clerk of a,joint stock company which was organized to main, tain a “social club” where the members thereof could provide for their own use, wine and beer, and such articles.of food as' seemed to be desirable. The property belonged jointly to the members of the club, and any member had the right at any time to withdraw all or any part of his stock therefrom.

<p>1. Execution sale: contract: right to redeem. Where a purchaser at au execution sale, after the sale, offered to convey to the execution debtor the land purchased, upon being paid a certain amount within a certain time, which amount the debtor agreed to pay within the time named, if he could raise it, but failed to perform on his part; held, that these facts would not support an action by the debtor against the purchaser and his grantee to redeem the land.</p>

<p> Appeal from Shelby Circuit Court. </p> <p>Action at law. There was a verdict and judgment thereon in the Circuit Court for plaintiff. Defendant appeals.</p>

Action to recover the value of certain horses alleged to have been killed by reason of the negligence of the defendant in running one of its trains. The accident occurred in the city of Yinton, between one and two o’clock at night. The plaintiff had turned the horses loose. They strayed upon the defendant’s track and lay down at a point where the track crossed one of the streets of the city.

Action in chancery to reform and enforce the specific performance of a contract executed by defendant for the purchase of an interest in a patent right for a brick machine, and an interest in the business of manufacturing and selling brick, prosecuted by the parties jointly. The answer, which is made a cross-bill, pleads that the contract was procured by fraud, and asks that it may be set aside and declared void.

The plaintiff filed a petition making tbe township trustees defendants and asking a certiorari, the object of which was to set aside certain proceedings of said trustees, whereby he was required to erect a partition fence between land owned by him and other land owned by the defendants. The latter appeared and asked to be substituted as defendants, which was done and the cause was submitted on a stipulation as to the facts.

<p>1. Evidence: res adjudicata. In an action to subject land to the satisfaction of a judgment, evidence as to matters which were adjudicated and concluded by the judgment is immaterial.</p> <p>2. Equity: quitclaim: deed: subjection op land to. judgment. Where P. conveyed to W. the land in controversy, in consideration of the agreement of W. to pay P. & C., and, on these facts, plaintiff one of the creditors of P. & C., obtained judgment against W. for the amount of P. & C’s indebtedness to him, held that plaintiff had the right in equity to subject the land to the satisfaction of the judgment, and, for that purpose, to follow it into the hands of W’s wife, who held it by quitclaim deed from. W., she not appearing to have paid value for the land.</p>

This is an action to recover damages on an injunction bond. There was a trial to the court without a jury and judgment for the plaintiffs. Defendants appeal.

The plaintiff William Crouch averred in his petition that in March, 1864, he was the owner of a county bounty warrant drawn in his favor for $100 by Allamakee county, and left in the custody of the clerk of the District Court of the county; that afterwards, and while the warrant was in the custody of the clerk, the defendant fraudulently obtained the warrant from the clerk and afterwards fraudulently presented the same to the treasurer of the county and drew the money due…

<p> Appeal from Benton District, Court. </p> <p>This is an action in equity, by wbicli it is sought to redeem certain real estate from a sale on execution. There was a trial to the court and a decree was entered dismissing the plaintiff’s petition, from which he appeals.</p>

Action upon a promissory note executed to the plaintiff by the defendant and one Mounce. The defendant for answer averred that he signed the note as surety; that the principal absconded; that the electors of the district township voted to release the defendant and afterwards the directors of the district township voted to release him, whereby he become released and discharged. The plaintiff demurred to the answer and the demurrer was sustained.

<p>1. New Trial: petition por: order op procedure under. Upon the hearing of a petition for a new trial, under the first subdivision of sections 3154 and 3155 of the Code, the court should first make an order of record granting (in a proper case), a new trial, before proceeding to determine the merits of the original case upon the issues made therein.</p> <p>2. Judgment Procured by Fraud: petition to vacate: measure op relief upon . Where plaintiff petitioned the court to “ set aside, va- . cate and reverse” a judgment rendered against him, on the ground of fraud practiced by the defendants in procuring it, and the issues were made up as prescribed under section 3158 of the Code, nothing could be tried but the question whether the judgment should be set aside and vacated; and it was error for the court, upon the trial on such petition, to render judgment against the defendants on the issues in the original cause.</p> <p>3. Judgment: prejudicial praud in securing: pacts constituting. The facts constituting the fraud practiced by defendants in procuring the judgment in this case considered, and held so prejudicial to plaintiff as to justify the vacation of the judgment against him.</p> <p>4. Practice in the Supreme Court: costs op amended abstract. Where the cause was reversed in the Supreme Court, and the abstract of appellant does not seem to have been prepared in bad faith, in order to throw the burden of preparing an additional abstract on the appellee, but, on the contrary, the appellant’s abstract fairly presented the questions to be determined, a motion to tax the cost of printing appellee’s additional abstract to the appellant must be overruled.</p>

Action at law. There was a verdict and judgment rendered thereon for defendant. Plaintiff appeals. The pleadings are set out and the facts are stated in the opinion.

Action to recover.for personal injuries sustained from a fall upon a sidewalk along a street of tbe town. Tlie petition is in the following language: “The defendant is an incorporated town in Allamakee county, Iowa.

Action to recover for personal injuries sustained by plaintiff from alleged obstructions allowed in a street of the town. After the evidence was all in, the court directed the jury to return a verdict for defendant for the reason that plaintiff failed to present any evidence upon which defendant can be held liable. There was a verdict and judgment entered accordingly for defendant. Plaintiff appeals.

Mandamus. Upon a trial on the merits the District Court dismissed plaintiff’s petition; he now appeals to this court. The facts of the case are fully stated in the opinion.

Action to recover for personal injuries sustained by plaintiff while in the employment of defendant, resulting from the negligence of a co-employe. The court instructed the jury to return a verdict for defendant upon the evidence submitted in the case, which was done, and a judgment was rendered accordingly, from which plaintiff appeals.

This is a proceeding under the statute by petition, to set aside the judgment and asking for a new trial in an action at law, wherein judgment was rendered for plaintiff. An order was entered granting a new trial from wbicb plaintiff appeals. The cause has before been in this court. See 53 Iowa, 362.

Appeal from Fayette Oi/rouit Cov/d. Action in chancery. Upon a trial on the merits plaint-ill’s petition was dismissed; he now appeals to this court.

Action at law to recover the amount and value of certain promissory notes received by defendant for collection from the father of plaintiff, which he negligently failed to collect and refused to deliver them to the guardian of plaintiff until the makers became insolvent, whereby they were wholly lost to plaintiff. The cause was tried to the court without a jury and judgment was rendered for plaintiff. Defendant appeals.

Action in chancery. The petition alleges that plaintiff contracted in writing with defendant Heisey for the purchase of certain real estate, and that Heisey afterwards sold it to defendant Eonen, who had actual knowledge of the sale to plaintiff.

Action in chancery to settle a partnership between the parties, and to recover an amount due plaintiff from defendant on account of the partnership transactions, and other sums arising upon other transactions. There was a decree for plaintiff in the sum of $867.14 Defendant appeals.

• The plaintiff claims of tbe defendant the rent of certain premises for the months of July and August, 1880, at the rate of $20 per month, under a written lease, executed October 1st, 1878.

This action was commenced February 8,1881. The plaintiff alleges in his petition that on May 7, 1871, he, the defendant, and A. S. Davis and Marshall Kingman formed a copartnership under articles authorizing either party to withdraw at the end of six months, taking one-fourth part of the value of the stock and assets, the remaining partners being required to pay such retiring partner for his interest in the assets, after paying the debts of the firm, within three months…

In February, 1880, A. Kershman, deceased, filed a petition stating that he had purchased of one Marsh certain described real estate upon which defendant had a mortgage; that before he paid Marsh for the land, defendant agreed he would release the same-from- the mortgage; that he did pay said Marsh, but defendant refused to release and had foreclosed the mortgage; that defendant was prevented from appearing in said action to foreclose the mortgage because of unavoidable…

Action to recover tbe amount of a judgment obtained against tbe plaintiff city by one Green, for a personal inj ury caused by an obstruction of a street by dirt placed in tbe street by tbe defendants. Tbe plaintiff avers that the defendants were notified of tbe action in which tbe judgment was obtained; that tbe plaintiff has paid tbe judgment, and that the defendants have become liable to reimburse tbe plaintiff for tbe amount thereof.

Action upon a promissory note purporting to be executed to tbe plaintiff by Atherton, Davis &' Co. The plaintiff avers in his petition that the defendants, A. S. Davis, M. Kingman and J. H. Hulbert, and one Atherton, were at the time of the execution of the note copartners in business under the firm name of Atherton, Davis & Co.; and that as such part-. ners they executed to the plaintiff the note in suit. Notice was served on Hulbert alone.

Action of mandamus. The plaintiff is situate in Delaware county and the defendant is treasurer of Clayton county.

Action in equity by a minor to redeem real estate sold for non-payment of taxes. Judgment for plaintiff and defendant appeals.

The original action was in equity for specific performance. There was a decree for the plaintiff, wbieli upon appeal was modified and affirmed by tbe Supreme Court. This appeal is by the defendants and is from certain alleged erroneous rulings made by the Circuit Court subsequent to the modification and affirmance by the Supreme Court.

Action of forcible detainer. There was a trial of the case before a justice of the peace, and judgment for the plaintiff. Upon appeal to the Circuit Court the judgment of the justice was affirmed. Defendants appeal.

Action brought against Delaware county to recover certain witness fees, to which plaintiff claims he is entitled, for attendance as a witness in a criminal case before a justice of the peace. The action was commenced before a justice of the peace where a judgment was rendered for the plaintiff, and upon a writ of error the judgment of the justice was affirmed by the Circuit Court. Defendant appeals;

On tbe 17 th day of August, 1881, tbe plaintiff ex rel. W. Y. Lucas, auditor of State, filed a petition in tbe Wapello.

The petition in this case avers in substance that the defendant was the owner of a certain tract of real estate, and that while s.uch owner he neglected to pay the taxes thereon for several years, and that the same was sold at tax sales; that during the time the defendant was such owner there was a vendor’s lien against the same, which lien became the property of the plaintiff; that said lien was created by one Hallett in favor of Hugh Barr, and was not a personal claim…

The plaintiff brought this action to recover the purchase price of a certain lot, and to foreclose a title bond given therefor. The intervenor claimed an interest in the amount which should be recovered, and a lien upon the lot in question therefor. Judgment was rendered against the defendants, in favor of plaintiff, for $1,113; and in favor of intervenor for $714.52. The intervenor appeals. The facts are stated in the opinion.

In the first count of ber petition the plaintiff alleges that the defendants wrongfully seized and converted to their own use a stock of goods of which the plaintiff was the owner, whereby she was damaged in the sum of $10,000. In the second count of her petition the plaintiff alleges that the defendants took possession of certain premises of which she was the owner and occupied them for six months, and that the rental thereof was reasonably worth $300.

This is an action to recover certain alleged excessive freight charges paid by the plaintiff to the defendent for transporting grain from Ackley in this State to Chicago, Illinois.- The canse was tried in the court below without a jury, and upon an agreement as to facts, and; judgment was rendered for the defendant for costs. Plaintiffs appeal.

Action to foreclose a mortgage. The defendant for answer avers a partial failure of consideration. The undisputed facts are that the defendant purchased of the plaintiff eighty acres of land; that he paid two hundred dollars in cash and gave his notes for $900, and a mortgage upon the land to secure them; that he paid the full amount except one note for two hundred dollars.

Action for the partition of real estate. The plaintiff claimed to own the undivided one-sixth part thereof. This was denied by the defendants. Upon the issue thus joined there was a trial, to the court, and from the judgment the defendants appeal.

The plaintiffs, claiming to be tbe owners of certain real estate, brought this action to set aside a tax title to tbe, same on tbe grounds: “First, that there was no assessment; Second, that there was a fraudulent combination among tbe purchasers at tbe tax sale; Thvrd, that there was no assessment to the unknown owners in tracts of forty acres corresponding to tbe smallest government subdivisions as required by law; and Fourth, that tbe owners being non-residents of tbe…

The petition states plaintiff recovered a judgment against the Burlington, Cedar Rapids and Minnesota Railway Company which remains wholly unpaid. That an execution issued on said judgment and the sheriff was unable to find any property on which to levy, whereupon demand was made on the officers of said company to point out property belonging to the company upon which the execution could be levied, but said officers failed and refused to do so.

Action upon a promissory note executed by the defendant o the Iowa Iron and Steel Fence Co. of Cedar Rapids, and sold and indorsed by the company to the plaintiff.

Action to foreclose a chattel mortgage. The plaintiff, as administrator of the estate of J. 0. Oayton, deceased, holds a promissory note drawn for $986.73, executed by the defendant to the plaintiff’s intestate, and secured by a mortgage on certain stock, grain and farming machinery, and which is the mortgage now sought to be foreclosed.

Action for damages for the alleged wrongful conversion of the. property of the estate of plaintiff’s intestate. The defendant pleaded a general denial. There was a trial to a jury, and a special but not a general verdict. The court rendered judgment for the plaintiff. The defendant appeals.

Action to recover for relief furnished to a pauper, one Mary J. Hays. The question presented in this case arises upon the construction of Sec. 1361 of the Code. The pauper resided within the limits of Waterloo, a city of the second class. The board of supervisors had appointed for the city an overseer of the poor. Application was made to him to provide relief for the pauper without her being sent to the county poor house, which he refused to do.

The plaintiff claims damages of the defendant and for cause of such claim alleges that the defendant so negligently-tied a certain stallion of the defendant in plaintiff’s barn, and with such a weak and insufficient halter that the stallion broke loose and injured a horse of the plaintiff, standing in a stall in said barn by breaking his leg. He avers that the damage was caused by the negligence of the defendant and without fault or negligence on his part.

Action upon a promissory note.' The defendant ~W. H. Harrington answered. There was a demurrer to the answer, which was sustained. The defendant failed to amend his answer. Judgment was rendered against him and he appeals.

This is an action to recover the value of two colts which it is alleged were killed by being run over by one of defendant’s trains. There was a trial by jury. At the close of the introduction of the plaintiff’s evidence the court, on motion of the defendant, directed the jury to return a verdict for the defendant. Plaintiff appeals.

The plaintiff alleges that the defendant contracted to furnish the plaintiff, on the 16th day of October, 1879, two cars in which to ship potatoes from Enfield, a station on defendant’s road, to Denison, Texas; that defendant failed to furnish the cars until the second day of November, and that by reason of this delay the potatoes were frozen, to the damage of plaintiff in the sum of $300.

Action to recover the value of a stock of drugs, medicines, and other merchandise, seized and sold' by defendant, who was the sheriff of the county, on certain executions issued upon judgment against John Craig, and J. R. Craig, plaintiffs, husband and son. There was a judgment upon a verdict for plaintiff. Defendant appeals.

This action was brought to recover money expended upon tbe order of the township trustees for the support of John Osborn, father of defendant, alleged to be a poor person, who is unable to maintain himself by work, and praying for a judgment and order of the court requiring and compelling defendant to support his father. There was a judgment granting the relief sought in plaintiffs petition. Defendant appeals.

Action to foreclose a mortgage. There was a decree of forecloseure as to part of the land, and the petition as to the other part was by the decree, in effect, dismissed. The plaintiffs appeal. The facts of the case appear in the opinion.

This is an action in equity for the recovery of certain sums of money paid by the Iowa Homestead Company, the plaintiff’s assignor, on account of taxes upon certain lands. The ownership of the lands was in dispute between the Homestead Company and the defendant Litchfield, and the taxes in question were paid during said controversy. The title to the land was finally determined to be in the defendant Litchfield.

This is a proceeding instituted for the purpose of determining the damages sustained by the plaintiff, because of tbe appropriation by the defendant of certain real estate belonging to tbe plaintiff for tbe purposes of its road. Tbe plaintiff appealed from tbe assessment made by tbe sheriff’s jury to the Circuit Court.

The plaintiffs are the executors of the estate of James W. Grimes, deceased. They are residents of the city of Burlington, where the estate is situated. Part of the estate consists of shares of stock in the Dunleith and Dubuque Bridge Co., which is a corporation of that name, incorporated under the general incorporation law's of the State of Iowa, and having its principal place of business in Dubuque county.

Appeal from Madison Oi/rouit Oowrt Action upon, a promissory note alleged to have been executed to the plaintiff by defendant’s testatrix, Jane Bar-dick The defendant for answer denied that his testatrix executed the note. There was a trial without a jury, and judgment was rendered for the defendant. The plaintiff appeals.

The defendant was indicted jointly with one Eply upon a charge of feloniously-breaking and entering a railroad car with intent to steal certain property therefrom. Upon a trial a verdict of guilty was found upon which judgment was entered. Defendant appeals.

<p>1. Indictment: manner of presentment: presumption of regularity. When the objection is raised to an indictment that it was not presented in the manner prescribed by the Code, it will be presumed, in the absense of a showing in the record to the contrary, that the requirements of the statute were complied with.</p> <p>2. -: OMISSION OF TITLE NOT FATAL: STATUTE CONSTRUED. An indictment will not be set aside because it does not contain the title of the cause and the names of the parties, as prescribed by Code, § 4297.</p> <p>3. -: larceny: allegation of ownership: statute construed. Under section 4305, par. 6, of the Code, in an indictment for larceny, it is a sufficient designation of the person injured to allege that the owner of the stolen property is to the jurors unknown; and the allegation that the goods were taken from the possession of the railroad company is sufficient, as showing special property in the company, to designate the person injured by the crime.</p>

Appeal from Des Moi/nes District Oov/rt. The defendant was indicted, tried and convicted upon a charge of stealing a bank check, and he appeals.

Indictment for permitting gambling. A demurrer to the indictment was overruled and judgment was rendered against the defendant, and he appeals.

Action in equity to foreclose a mechanic’s lien. The de- . fendant Anderson contracted with one Troutman, a carpenter, to build a house for him in the city of Des Moines, and furnish the material. Troutman bought the lumber for the house, of the plaintiffs, who were lumber dealers in the city of Des Moines.

Action in chancery to rescind and set aside a conveyance to defendant, granting the right of way for its railroad upon land of plaintiffs. Upon a demurrer, plaintiffs ’ petition was dismissed; they now appeal.

Indictment for taking from the custody of an officer certain goods and chattels. The defendant was found guilty and judgment rendered thereon and he appeals.

The defendant pleaded a counter-claim and denied plaintiff’s right to recover. By consent there was a reference to Hon. F. W. Newman, who made a finding of facts, and recommended that judgment be rendered for the plaintiff. Exceptions were filed to the report of the referee, which were overruled and judgment rendered for the plaintiff. The defendant appeals.

G-. W. Devin was garnished as the debtor of the Ottumwa Water Power Company, upon an execution, issued on a judgment in favor of' tbe plaintiffs, and against defendant, the company. The garnishee answering, denied indebtedness to the defendant in execution, and ah issue was formed upon his answer which was tried to a jury and judgment rendered for plaintiffs against the garnishee, who now appeals.

This is an action of replevin by which the plaintiffs seek to recover of the defendants certain packages of tea. There was a demurrer to the petition, which was sustained, and plaintiffs appeal. The facts appear in the opinion.

The indictment in this case charges that the defendant broke and entered the barn of J. M. Holland in which barn goods and merchandise and other things of value were kept for use, sale and deposit, with felonious intent to take, steal, and carry away the goods, merchandise, and other valuable things; and twenty bushels of wheat of the value of $14, six sacks of the value of $2, and one bridle of the value of $1.50 of the goods of J. M. Holland did feloniously take, steal,…

Action upon a promissory note for less than one hundred dollars. There was a trial to the court, and judgment for the plaintiff. Defendant appeals.

Action upon an account. There was a trial to a jury, and verdict and judgment were rendered for the defendant. The plaintiff appeals.

Action to recover one-balf of tbe value of a hedge grown bj plaintiffs upon the line of their land, which constitutes a division fence between plaintiffs’ and defendants’ lands. There was a verdict' for plaintiffs and a judgment rendered thereon, from which defendants appeal. The facts of the case appear in the opinion.

' Action to foreclose a chattel mortgage upon a stock of dry goods and notions. In the petition for foreclosure the plaintiff prayed for the appointment of a receiver to take possession of the goods and to sell the same in the ordinary course of business. In an amended petition he brought' in and made defendants a large number of attaching creditors who had garnished the plaintiff. The court appointed a receiver as prayed.

Action to quiet title to a certaiu lot in tbe city of Burlington. The plaintiff avers that he is the owner thereof, subject to a life estate in an undivided two-thirds thereof, during the life of his mother, formerly Lucinda Tice, now Lucinda Burk-hart. The defendants, Mark Derby and Laura C. Derby, claim to own the whole lot.

Action in chancery to enforce a mechanic’s lien. The owner of the ’property, a mortgagee, and certain lien-holders, were made defendants. The lien of the intervenor for a part of the amount claimed was enforced by the decree, but made inferior to the mortgage and the other -liens. The intervenor and the owner of the property appeal.

The plaintiff filed a petition alleging “That he is the fee simple owner of the north half of lot 2, in block No. 5, McIntosh’s 2d addition to Davenport, and that, as he is informed and believes, the defendant, O’Meara makes a claim on said real estate adverse to said estate of your petitioner; that, theretofore, to-wit: on the 8th day of November, 1880, one Elizabeth II.

The plaintiff brings this action to quiet her title to certain lands in the petition described. The defendant claims the land under judicial sales upon executions against George W. Jones, and alleges that George ~W. Jones caused the title to all of said lands to be placed in the hands of the plaintiff, his wife, for the purpose of defrauding his creditors. The court quieted the plaintiff’s title, and canceled the sheriff’s deeds under which the defendant claims the property.

Action upon a promissory note. The cause was submitted to the Circuit Court upon the question of the negotiability of the note, under a written stipulation of the attorneys of the parties, and the court decided that the instrument is not negotiable. Plaintiffs appeal.

At the request of plaintiffs the fence viewers of the proper township determined the sufficiency and value of a hedge grown by plaintiffs upon the line dividing their land from land of defendants. Erom the action of the fence viewers in the proceedings defendants appealed to the Circuit Court, where the appeal was dismissed upon the ground that it is not authorized by the law. Erom the decision of the Circuit Court defendants appeal to this court.

The case was originally tried before the mayor of the town, and the defendant was found guilty. An appeal was taken, and upon a trial in the District Court he was again convicted, and he appeals,

A. J. Wilson was indicted in Ringgold county and the defendant gave a bond or undertal&ing for the appearance of the said Wilson to answer the charge against him. After-wards the venue in the criminal proceeding was changed on the application of the defendant therein to tile District Court of Lucas county. A. J. Wilson failed to appear in the last named court and county, and this action is brought to recover on the undertaking.

Appeal from Wapello District Court The defendant was indicted for the crime of an assault upon one Eyan w'ith intent to commit murder, and was convicted of an assault with intent to commit manslaughter. Judgment having been rendered upon the verdict he appeals'.

Action on a written lease to recover amount claimed to be due. One Ronaldson,'was the lessor, and lie assigned the lease to the plaintiff. The defendant pleaded an equitable defense and alleged the agreement was, in case the buildings were destroyed, the lease should terminate and he be released from the payment of rent, and that., in reducing the contract to writing, such provision was by mistake omitted, and he asked that it be reformed so as to express the true contract.

This action was brought upon the complaint of one Christina Halbasch to charge the defendant as the- father of a bastard child. There was a trial to a jury, and verdict and judgment were rendered against the defendant, who now ap peals to this court.

The plaintiffs bring this'action for tbe alleged conversion by the defendant of nearly thirteen thousand bushels of corn, which the plaintiffs claim they purchased from one J. 0. Pike. ■ The plaintiffs base their title to the grain upon cei*tain receipts which are claimed to be warehouse receipts. The defendant denies generally the allegations of the petition and alleges that the grain in question was purchased in his name, with money furnished by him to Pike.

Appeal from Poweshielc District Court. Action to foreclose a mortgage, judgment for the plaintiff, and defendant and intervenor. appeals.

The defendant Stomback was elected road supervisor of district No. 10 in Washington township, and gave a bond for the faithful performance of the duties of his office. This action was brought on such bond. The cause was referred and a finding of facts made by the referee, on which judgment was rendered for the plaintiff and defendants appeal.

The action was brought to foreclose a deed of trust covering a certain grist mill and other property. The defendants admit the execution of the deed of trust, and that a certain amount is due thereon, which amount, however, they aver is much less than the amount claimed by the plaintiffs.

Indictment for forging a promissory note for the amount of $100. To the indictment the defendant, Henry, pleaded guilty, and from tbe judgment rendered tbereon appeals.

Action upon a sheriffs official bond to recover an amount of money collected upon an execution against plaintiffs which was in excess of the amount due thereon. The cause was tried to the court without a jury, and upon the facts specially found a judgment was rendered against defendant who appeals to this court.

Action to recover for legal services rendered by plaintiffs, who are attorneys at law. A verdict was had for plaintiffs, and a judgment was rendered thereon. Defendant appeals.

The defendant was convicted of tbe crime of seduction. Judgment having been rendered upon tbe verdict, be appeals to this court.

An indictment in 'two counts was presented against the defendant, charging him in one count with forging a note of $100, and in the other count with uttering as true the said forged promissory note. The defendant pleaded not guilty, and at the March term, 1881, was tried and convicted on both counts, and sentenced, on the first count to imprisonment for four years, and on the second count to imprisonment for two years, to commence at the expiration of the four years term.

This action was commenced in June 1880, and notice was served for the October term of the court in 1880. At that time plaintiff by consent took sixty days to amend his petition, and defendant was given thirty days thereafter to answer. The amendment was filed December 2, 1880, and on January 10, 1881, and in vacation, plaintiff• filed a motion for default. The answer was filed January 20, 1881.

Action in attachment brought before a justice of the peace. The defendant moved to discharge the attachment on the ground that the property levied on was exempt from execution. The motion was supported by an affidavit showing the property exempt. The court overruled the motion and rendered judgment for the plaintiff.

Action of replevin for certain grain. The canse was tried without a jury and, upon facts found by the court, judgment was rendered for plaintiff. Defendant appeals. The facts of the case fully appear in the opinion.

Afjpeal from Monroe District.Gourt. This is a proceeding instituted by tlie plaintiff under § 3157 of tbe Code to procure a new trial in an action brought by the defendant, Elizabeth Harnett, against tbe plaintiff, her husband, to procure a divorce on tbe ground of inhuman treatment. The petition fora new trial is based upon tbe alleged ground of newly discovered evidence.

This action involves the question whether or not, certain real estate in the city of Muscatine is exempt from taxation. The Circuit Court held that it is exempt, and the city appeals.

<p>1. Mortgage: redemption prom bv purchaser under junior judgment. The plaintiff was an execution purchaser of land on a judgment which was a lien upon the land subsequent and inferior to defendant’s mortgage, which was due, and plaintiff brought this action to redeem from the prior mortgage and to be subrogated to the rights of the mortgage; 7¡eld, that such right to redeem and to be subrogated existed at common law, and that there is nothing in our statute abrogating that right.</p>

. This is an action in equity, commenced on the 7th day of June, 1875, to set aside a judgment recovered by M. E. Griffin against the plaintiff, and to cancel the sale and sheriff’s deed thereunder to Simeon B. Griffin. The court granted the plaintiff the relief prayed. The defendants appeal. The material facts are stated in the opinion.

Action to recover double tbe value of certaiu horses killed and injured by a train upon tlie road of defendant at a point where it had a right to construct fences. There was a verdict and a judgment for plaintiff; defendant appeals.

This is an action to recover for a personal injury received by tbe plaintiff while in the employment of the defendant and engaged in coupling cars. There was a trial by jury, and a verdict and judgment for the plaintiff. Defendant appeals. The facts appear in the opinion.

The plaintiff was surety for one Keefer on a promissory note, given to the school fund, which was secured by mortgage.' The mortgage was foreclosed and the real estate sold to the defendants. Shortly previous to the expiration of twelve months from the sale, the plaintiff sought to redeem by depositing the proper amount of money in the clerk’s office. His right to do so was denied, and this action brought to enforce such right.

Action to recover for a personal injury. The plaintiff avers in his petition that he climbed upon one of the defendant’s freight ti’ains while in motion; that he did so without á ticket and without the consent of the company; that one of the defendant’s brakemen, in the course of his employment, negligently and willfully forced him from the train while in motion, and caused him to fall through a bridge, from which he received the injury complained of.

<p> Appeal from KeoTcmk District Gov/rt. </p> <p>This is an action for slander. Tbe petition and amendment thereto allege in a large number of different forms of speech that the defendant said of the plaintiff that she stole corn. Among other defenses the defendant pleaded what was regarded by the court and the parties as a justification of the alleged slanderous utterances. There was a trial by jury and a judgment and verdict for the defendant. Plaintiff appeals.</p>

Action on account before a justice of the peace; judgment for the plaintiff. Defendants sued out a writ of error and the Circuit Court set aside the judgment of the justice. The plaintiff appeals.

Action upon a promissory note executed by defendants to tbe plaintiffs. Tbe case was tried to tbe court without a jury and judgment was rendered for defendants. Plaintiffs appeal.

This is an action in equity for the recovery of an amount expended in repairs of a certain bridge, and for a decree determining upon whom rests the obligation to keep the bridge in repair. The defendant, Black Hawk County, filed a demurrer to the petition which the court sustained. The defendant, the Union Mill Company, filed an answer and upon the trial the court dismissed the plaintiff’s petition. The plaintiff appeals.

Appeal from Tama Circuit Court Action upou a promissory note originally commenced before a justice of tbe peace where a judgment was rendered for plaintiff; on appeal by defendants to the Circuit Court a like judgment was rendered and defendants now appeal to this court. The facts of the case appear in the opinion.

Action at law. Tbe pleadings and facts of tbe case are fully set out 'in the opinion. There was a judgment upon a verdict for defendants, plaintiff appeals.

This is a proceeding of garnishment upon execution from a justice’s court. D. B. and Marianda Smith intervened and claimed that the amounts garnished were exempt as personal earnings within ninety days. The justice rendered judgment in favor of plaintiff against the garnishees. Upon appeal the Circuit Court held that the garnished funds were exempt. The plaintiff appeals. The facts are stated in the opinion.

The plaintiff commenced an action for divorce from his wife, the defendant, on the ground of cruel and inhuman treatment. The defendant denied the allegations of the petition and filed a cross-petition claiming a divorce from the plaintiff on the ground of cruel and inhuman treatment, desertion and habitual drunkenness. Pending the trial the court made an order that the defendant pay into court for the use of the plaintiff, to pay his attorney, $25. This sum was not paid.

Plaintiff commenced this action in detinue to recover a stock of goods, and for damages for the unlawful detention of the same. R. M. Sylvester, deputy sheriff, and Dalhoff & Oo. were made defendants, and it appears from the petition that Sylvester levied an execution upon the goods, in a case in which Dalhoff & Oo. were plaintiffs in execution, and a partnership named Porter & Porter were defendants.

The plaintiff presented to the Judge of Henry Circuit Court a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, alleging that he was unlawfully restrained of his liberty by J. R. Davidson, sheriff of Henry county, in the county jail of said county.

Court. The defendant, White, commenced an action to foreclose a mortgage executed to liim by one Griggs, on certain real estate. The defendant, Miller, on the application of White, was appointed a receiver to take charge of certain crops growing on the mortgaged premises. The plaintiffs intervened in said action, claiming they were entitled to the possession of said crops under a chattel mortgage executed to them.

Action upon an account brought before a justice of the peace. The account sued on was for $32.15, but the plaintiff admitted payments to the amount of $12.00 and asked judgment only for the balance, $20.15. The defendants for answer denied all indebtedness and pleaded payments to the amount of $29.00. This plea of payments they called a counter-claim. The plaintiff recovered judgment before the justice for $3.70.

The defendant was tried in the court below under an indictment for an assault with intent to commit a rape, and was convicted. He appeals.

This is a prosecution under an indictment for the crime of uttering a forged deed. There was a trial by jury and defendant was convicted, and he appeals.

<p> Appeal from Marshall District Court. </p> <p>Action in equity. Decree for the plaintiff and defendants appeal.</p>

Appeal from Decatur Cvrcuit Court. The defendant was convicted of the larceny of a mare and sentenced to tbe penitentiary for one year. He appeals.

Action for an injunction to restrain the defendant, as road supervisor, from opening an alleged county road. An injunction was granted in favor of one of the plaintiffs, B. F. 0. Everist, and on final hearing was made perpetual. The defendant appeals.

Action in chancery to enforce the specific performance of an oral contract to execute a mortgage upon defendants’ homestead in security for money loaned them by plaintiff. Upon answer of defendants, the bill was dismissed on motion. Plaintiff appeals.

The plaintiff, claiming it Lad furnished support to a poor person who had a legal settlement in the defendant county, commenced this proceeding to recover the amount thus expended. Trial by jury,'verdict and judgment for the plaintiff. The defendant appeals.

Action by equitable proceedings to enforce an ante-nuptial contract between plaintiff and ber deceased husband, defend-, ant’s- intestate, and to recover an annuity secured by it. . The plaintiff’s petition was dismissed by the Circuit Court, and she now appeals to this court.

This is an action in equity of P. B. Starr and A. M. Harrison, surviving members of the late firm of Starr, Patterson & Harrison, against the administrator and heirs at law of <J. G. Patterson, deceased, for an accounting of the business of said firm.

Afjpeal from Story Circuit Court. The defendant is the owner of a hotel in the town of Nevada. In front of the building there is a porch, and steps thereto, which extend beyond the line of defendant’s lot and into the adjacent street about eight feet, and which totally obstruct that part of the street covered by them, the porch being some four or five feet above the level of the street.

This is a proceeding under section two of chapter eight of the laws of 1874, to establish certain courses and boundary lines of lands of the respective parties. Commissioners were appointed and a survey was made .which established certain courses and boundaries. The commissioners made their report to the court. The defendants filed objections thereto. The objections were overruled and the report was affirmed, and the oosts were adjudged against the defendants.

I). D Miracle, Judge of the Circuit Court of 11th Judicial District. The defendant is warden.of tbe penitentiary at Et. Madison and the plaintiff is confined therein. For the purpose of testing the legality of his confinement, the plaintiff obtained a writ of habeas corpus. Upon the hearing it was held the plaintiff was not illegally restrained and he was remanded to the custody of the defendant. From such order the plaintiff appeals.

Action in equity to establish the lien of a judgment upon certain premises, and to subject them to the payment of the judgment. The defendants, L. Maasden and Marie E. Maasden, aver that the premises constitute their homestead, and that as such they are exempt from execution.' The premises in question consist of a fraction of a lot in the city of Pella, on which is a two story brick building twenty-five by eighty feet with a basement.

<p>1. Mechanic’s Lien: statement for: form of. Under section 1851 of the Revision, as amended by chapter 111, of the laws of 1862, it was not necessary, in a statement for a mechanic’s lien, to set forth the name of the owner of the property at the time the hen was filed, accordingly it was held that, where the owner who had incurred the indebtedness died before the filing of the lien, it was sufficient, as against the heirs, to file the lien against the estate of the deceased owner.</p> <p>2. -: foreclosure of: parties TO- In an action to foreclose a mechanic’s hen, under sections 1858 and 1859 of the Revision, where the owner who had incurred the indebtedness di ed before the sui fc was brough t, it was not necessary to mate the heirs parties to the suit. A foreclosure against the administrator of the deceased party is just as binding upon his heirs or devisees as would have been a foreclosure against himself during his life time.</p> <p>3. -:-: statute of limitations waived. Where, in an action to foreclose a mechanic’s lien, there were proper parties defendant, who might have plead the statute of limitations, but did not, held that the defense was waived, and that it could not afterwards he interposed in a collateral proceeding to defeat the title acquired by the foreclosure proceedings.</p> <p>4. Administrator: right to acquire title to property op decedent. Where the property of decedent was sold at judicial sale, held that the administratrix who was decendent’s widow, was not, on account of her fiduciary relation to the estate, precluded from tailing to herself an assignment of the certificate of purchase from a third party, and that a deed made to her thereunder gave her as good a title to the property as against the heirs as such a deed would have given to her assignor.</p> <p>On re-heaving, the 4th point was affirmed, and the following additional points were made in argument.</p> <p>5. -:-. In the absence of fraud, one who, as a trustee; has sold an estate, may afterwards repurchase it for himself.</p> <p>6. -: -. A purchase by an executor, under an execution against his testator, is not void, but simply voidable at the election of the legatees, exercised within a reasonable time.</p> <p>7. Practice: relief limited by pleadings. Relief can be granted alone on the case made in the pleadings: Accordingly held that, as plaintiff can have relief only by the setting aside of a judicial sale, which sale she has not attacked in her petition, she cannot have the relief demanded in this case.</p>

<p>1. Practice; negligence of clerk: action dismissed for. Amotion was made .to dismiss plaintiff's action, because the clerk had failed to make a memorandum in the appearance docket of the date of .filing the petition, and the court sustained the motion: Held properly sustained, under section 200 of the Code, which provides that no pleading of any description shall be considered as filed until such memorandum is made.</p>

Action to set aside a guardian’s deed. The plaintiff avers in his petition that, in 1871, he was a minor, and the owner of the land in question; that the defendant, George L. Bunce, made a pretended guardian’s sale of the land, and the other defendants claim to have acquired an interest in the land through such sale.

The defendant instituted proceedings to condemn a strip of land seventy-five feet wide as right of way for its road over certain real estate belonging to the plaintiffs. From the award of the sheriff’s jury the plaintiffs appealed to the Circuit Oourt, where there was a trial by jury, verdict for the plaintiffs, and judgment as provided by statute. The defendant appeals.

This is an action to recover part of the purchase price of a grain seeder which the defendant bought of one Sheldon, who sold the same as the agent of P. P. Mast & Co. Two promissory notes in the sum of forty dollars each were given lor the seeder, payable on the first day of October 1877 and 1878 respectively. The notes were indorsed to P. P. Mast & Co., and the one which became due October 1, 1877, was paid.

The plaintiff filed a petition praying for his discharge, upon a writ of habeas corpus, from the Jasper county jail. The writ of habeas corpus was duly issued and upon the hearing the court refused to discharge the petitioner. The plaintiff appeals.

This is a proceeding in certiora/ri by which it is sought to annul the action of the board of supervisors in approving and confirming a re-survey of a public road. Upon a trial in the Circuit Court the proceedings before the board of supervisors were held to be authorized by law, and the plaintiff appeals.

This action, was brought to foreclose a mortgage. A decree of forelcosure was rendered, and a special execution was issued. Before the sale tbe defendants delivered to the sheriff a plan of division of the land and demanded of him that he sell in accordance therewith. This he refused to do, and sold in a manner different from the plan, and the plaintiffs became the purchasers.

This is a controversy between tlie plaintiff and W. H. Ap. plegate & Co. as to their right to priority as creditors of the defendants, Winters & Hill, in a certain balance of the proceeds of a stock of goods which were taken and sold on a chattel mortgage. There was a demurrer tq the petition of intervention of W. H. Applegate & Go., which was sustained, and they appeal.

■ These cases are submitted together as arising for the most part out of substantially the same state of facts. The last two, however, differ from the first in one respect which will be noticed in the opinion. The plaintiffs respectively seek injunctions to restrain the defendants, the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy, R. R. Co., and the Chillicothe & Chariton R. R. Co., from condemning for right of way certain land of which they are respectively the owners.

District Oou/rt. This is a jnoceeding under tbe statute asking tbe appointment of a commissioner to establish a lost corner. Tbe plaintiff appeals.

Action at law to recover damages for tlie breach by defendant of tlie conditions of a written agreement between the parties. The cause was tried without a jury aud judgment was rendered for the plaintiff upon findings of fact and law by the court. Defendant appeals. The facts appear in the opinion.

The plaintiff claims damages in tlie sum of one hundred dollars for an injury to a horse, alleged to have been caused by a defective crossing over defendants road; the defect consisting in placing the plank on the'inside of one of the iron rails of the road so far from the rail that, in driving the horse over the crossing, he stepped into the aperture thus made, and was injured and crippled. There was a trial by jury and a verdict and judgment for the plaintiff.

This is an action of replevin for tbe following goods and chattels: One board partition, one sliot-gnn, one rifle, one desk, one invoice book, one account book, eight joints of stove pipe, eight white wash brushes, one papering board, two trestles, one extension ladder, three brackets, three scaffolding hoards, one spring wagon and pole, two horses and one sign.

Action against the sureties uj)on k bond given by an agent of plaintiff to secure the faithful performance of his duties. There was a judgment upon a verdict for plaintiff; defendants appeal.

The plaintiffs are commission merchants, residing in Boston, Mass., and the defendants are dealers in butter, at Nevada, Iowa. In 1877 and 1878 the latter shipped to the former several consignments of butter to be sold on the market. The plaintiffs claim the defendants are indebted to them for advances, interest, and storage of the butter, to recover which this action was brought.

This is a proceeding to ascertain tbe compensation to which, the plaintiff is entitled by reason of the appropriation of part of his farm for right of way for defendant’s railroad. There was a trial by jury, and a verdict and judgment for plaintiff for $100, and defendant appeals.

It is averred in the petition that in December, 1873, the plaintiff was the owner of a block of'lots in the city of Marshall, and that in Seprember, 1871, a five per cent railroad tax was voted in the township in which the block is situated, and that the tax was levied and placed upon the tax books; that on the 18th of May, 1872, the township trustees certified to the county treasurer that the railroad company had complied with the law, and was entitled to the tax, and that…

This action was brought before a justice of the peace to recover upon a promissory note. The amount called for by the note was $91.50, being the principal, $90, and the accrued interest, $1.50. The note also provided for an attorneys fee. The court rendered judgment for the plaintiff for $91.50 as the amount of the note, and for cost taxed at $12.05, and allowed as a part of the costs an attorney’s fee of $9.15, being ten per cent of the amount allowed upon the note.

Action to charge defendants as the guarantors of a promissory note. Judgment was rendered upon a verdict for defendants. Plaintiff appeals. The case has before been in this court. See 52 Iowa, S91.

The substance of tbe petition is, that in September, 1880, tbe defendant leased and delivered twenty cows to tbe plaintiff, for three years, by a written contract, by wbicb it was agreed that tbe plaintiff should keep tbe cows and their increase in a certain specified manner, and at tbe end of tbe three years tbe stock and increase was to be ajipraised by disinterested parties, and tbe defendant was to have tbe original value of tbe twenty bead of cows, in cows between tbe…

This is an action to recover for the alleged breaeh of contract for the sale of cattle. There was a trial by jury and verdict and judgment for the plaintiff.’ Defendants appeal.

Apjpealfrom Clinton Ci/rouit Cov/rt. The plaintiff’s petition alleges that it is a duly organized corporation, and that during the month of February, 1881, it was operating a line of railway in Clinton county, passing through a farm occupied by defendant; that where plaintiff’s railway passes through defendant’s farm plaintiff had its right of way fenced against live stock running at large, and had constructed and maintained a private crossing for the accommodation of…

<p>1. Tax Sale: redemption: error oe tresasurer. Where the owner of a certificate of purchase of land at tax sale filed in the county treasure’s office, on the 27th day of November, an affidavit of notice to the owner of the land of the expiration of the time of redemption, but the entry on the tax sale register showed that such affidavit was filed on the 29th day of November, held that the owner, in the absence of anything to put him on inquiry as to the true date of filing, was justified in relying upon the entry in the register, and was entitled to redeem the land within ninety days from the 29th day of November.</p>

<p>1. Appeal to Supreme Court; improper parties appellant. Where a judgment was rendered against the estate of an administrator, he being at the time dead, and an appeal to the supreme Court was taken from such judgment in the name of the administrator and his bondsmen, held that the appeal must be dismissed for want of proper parties appellant: — the administrator being dead, the cause could not proceed in his name, and there being no judgment against the bondsmen, they could not prosecute the appeal.</p>

Henry Red was indicted in Polk county and charged with the crime of murder. A change of venue was taken to Jasper county. The plaintiff, Seaton, appeared as attorney for the State, and brought this action to recover for his services. The claim was afterwards assigned to one Doran who intervened in the action. . Trial to the court, judgment for the defendant, and plaintiff appeals.

<p>1. Practice in Supreme Court: abstract not denied taken as true. When the appellee files an additional abstract, which is not controverted by the appellant, such additional abstract will be deemed correct, and taken as true, unless the appellant files a paper expressly notifying the court that there is a controversy requiring determination. But this rule is not to be understood as applicable to a case where the appellant’s abstract states that it is an abstract of all the evidence, and appellee’s abstract denies the truth of such statement.</p>

This is an action in equity to recover of the defendants, Julia A. and A. J. Jack, damages for an alleged failure to complete according to contract a certain building in tbe city of Des Moines. The court adjudged that the plaintiff recover of the defendant, Julia A. Jack, four hundred and sixty-two dollars. The defendant, Julia A. Jack, appeals. The facts are stated in the opinion.

Action to recover for the negligence and want of skill of defendants who are surgeons, in treating a broken arm of the infant plaintiff. After answer of defeudants denying the allegations of the petition, the court dismissed the action upon a stipulation signed by tbe next friend, who prosecuted tbe suit for tbe infant. Tbe plaintiff appeals.

<p>1. Evidence: impeaching witness for bad moral character: statute construed. In section 3649 of the Code, which provides that “the general moral character of a witness may he proved for the purpose of testing his credibility,” the word “character" means reputation; and testimony offered which did not relate to the reputation of the witness as to moral'character, hut was intended tó show his moral character as known to the witness, independent of reputation, was held properly excluded.</p>

Action to quiet title to part of tbe NW. ^ of tbe SW. ¿ of section 26, township 71, range 25', west. Tbe plaintiff avers that be is the owner of the same by virtue of an execution sale and sheriff’s deed. Tbe defendant, W. M. Wilson, avers that be is tbe owner by purchase and conveyance from one N. E. Wilson. There was a decree for tbe plaintiff. Tbe defendant appeals.

The plaintiff prays a writ of injunction to restrain the enforcement of a judgment, rendered by O. H. Turner, a justice of the peace of Des Moines township, Polk county, for three hundred dollars and costs, upon a note purporting to be executed by the plaintiff and J. M. Link, Hampton Horton and L. F. Nicholls, a transcript of which judgment was filed in the office of the clerk of the Circuit Court of said county.

The plaintiff brings this action as indorsee of an instrument in writing purporting to be signed by the defendant, as follows: “$179.00. Des Moines, Iowa,' Nov. 15,1879. “On or before the 15th day of November, 1879, for value received in corn grinder and crusher, I, the subscriber, of Beaver township, Polk county, Iowa, promise to pay to the order of II.

Action upon a promissory note. The defenses were that the note was executed without any consideration, and that it had been, fully paid. There was a trial by jury, and a verdict and judgment for the defendant. Plaintiff apppeals.

This is an action in equity to set aside a conveyance of real estate as in fraud of creditors.

This is an action for the recovery of damages for the alleged unlawful conversion of certain personal property. It is averred in the petition that the property was taken by virtue of an execution against one L. Wells, in favor of Lord Stoughtenburg & Co. That the plaintiff was the owner thereof by virtue of a chattel mortgage executed and delivered by said L. Wells to the plaintiff.

This is an action upon a book account for $90. Suit was originally commenced before a justice of tbe peace against tbe appellant and one O’Connor. ' O’Connor aceejited service-of tbe original notice and made default, and judgment was rendered- against bim. Tbe suit was commenced in Calboun county, and tbe original notice was served on tbe appellant in Dubuque county.

The plaintiffs are the heirs at law of Adam Eickett, deceased, and brought this action to recover certain real estate belonging to the said Eickett at his decease. The defendants claim to own the real estate in controversy, their title being based on a conveyance by the administrator de bonis non of the deceased. The court found in favor of the defendants and dismissed the petition. The plaintiff appeals.

This is a proceeding in garnishment against the defendant, M. A. Hoffman. The plaintiff holds a judgment against the defendant, John N. Hoffman, a member, of the firm of Silvers & Hoffman. Upon his judgment he caused execution to issue, and caused M. A. Hoffman, wife of John N. Hoffman, to be garnished. The statutory questions were propounded to her by the sheriff, all of which she answered in the negative. Afterward a referee was appointed to examine her further.

This action was brought to obtain a decree for conveyance by the defendant to the plaintiff of lots 22 and 23 in Pleasant Hill addition to the city of Des Moines, and also a decree for the reasonable rent thereof. The defendant denied the allegations of the petition, and filed a counter-claim in which he averred that there was due him, from the plaintiff, a balance of an account.

This is an action in equity to compel the defendant to re-convey to tbe plaintiff the undivided one third of a certain eighty acres of land. The court dismissed the plaintiff’s petition. The plaintiff appeals. The facts are stated in the opinion.

This is an action in equity by which it is sought to subject certain real estate and personal property, the title to which is in the defendant, Thomas J. Haddock, to the payment of certain judgments against the other defendants, upon the alleged ground that the property was conveyed by the other defendants to Thomas J. Haddock in fraud of the rights of plaintiff as a creditor. There was a decree in the Circuit Court for the plaintiffs, 'and defendants appeal.

This is an action in equity to subject certain town lots, the legal title to which is in the defendant, Sarah A. Templeton, to the payment of a judgment recovered by the plaintiff against the defendant, S. II. Templeton. The court granted the relief prayed as to all the property in controversy, except two lots, which the court held were exempt from execution as the homestead of the defendants. From the dismissal of the petition as to these two lots the plaintiff appeals.

Action to quiet the title to certain land. The defendants by a cross bill set up title to the land in defendant, T. W. Harrison, and prayed tliat his title be quieted. There was á decree dismissing plaintiff’s petition and quieting the title in defendant, T. W. Harrison. Plaintiff appeals.

Tiie plaintiff is a physician, and seeks to recover in this action for his services as such, and for medicines furnished a poor person under the authority of the township trustees. Judgment for the plaintiff, and defendant appeals.

<p> Appeal from Cherokee District Court. </p> <p>Action upon promissory notes. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant appeals..</p>

It appears from the averments of the petition that the plaintiff was married to ¥m. Marvin in the State of Ohio in the year 1852, and in 1856 she obtained a diyorce from him in that State on her petition, he being the party in fault. ¥m. Marvin died in the year 1880. At the time of the marriage and up to the time of his death he was the owner of 160 acres of land in Polk county in this State.

<p>1. Vendor and Vendee; covenants oe warranty: liability oe vendor: measure,oe damages. In this case the defendant conveyed to one S., with the usual covenants of warranty, certain land to which it had no title. S. afterwards mortgaged the land to the plaintiff to secure the payment of certain notes, the mortgage containing the following recital: “The intention being hereby to convey an absolute title in fee simple.” S. afterwards conveyed the land to J. 0., subject to the mortgage to plaintiff, and J. C. afterwards conveyed to M. C., who perfected her title by securing a conveyance from the real owner, the amount paid by her therefor not appearing. Plaintiff herein sues the defendant upon the breach of its covenants of warranty, to recover ■ the amount due on his mortgage notes, but the court held that neither S. (the original grantee), nor any one holding under her, could buy in the paramount title, and recover of the defendant? more than the amount paid therefor, with interest; and that she could not, by her mortgage to plaintiff, have conveyed to him any greater rights against defendant than the she herself possessed; and since it does not appear how much M. C. paid for the paramount title, plaintiff is entiled upon the record to only nominal damages.</p>

This is an action in equity to quiet title to certain land. The defendant claims the land under a tax deed. The plaintiff claims that the land was not subject to taxation for the year for which it was sold, and that no sufficient notice was given of the expiration of the time of redemption, and no sufficient affidavit was made of the service of the notice.

This is an action to recover double damages for tbe killing of plaintiff’s borse, upon defendant’s depot grounds, by a train running, it is alleged, at a greater rate of speed than eight miles an hour. Upon motion of the defendant, all that portion of the petition relating to double damages was stricken out.

Action upon a sheriff’s bond. The defendants are sureties upon the bond. The principal, one Innis, is dead. The plaintiff obtained a judgment against one Yan Sickle and caused execution to be issued and placed in the hands of Innis, who was sheriff of Plymouth county. No levy was made by Innis, and the plaintiff avers that he was guilty of negligence in not making a levy. The defendants deny that he was guilty of negligence.

Action in chancery to set aside and declare void a certain deed, and a mortgage executed by the First Methodist Espiscopal Church of Frankville, on the ground that they were made with the fraudulent purpose of hindering and delaying its creditors. Upon a trial on the merits plaintiff’s petition was dismissed; he now appeals to this court. The facts of the case are fully stated in the opinion of the court.

This action was commenced On the 18th day of September, 1869, for the dissolution of the partnership existing between the plaintiff and the defendant, George Burden, the distribution of the partnership assets, the appointment of a receiver, and an injunction to prevent the defendants, Eliza A. Burden, and Richard Babbage, from disposing of certain firm property placed in their possession by the defendant, George Burden.

Appeal to the Supreme Court: amount less than $100: questions OF LAW ONLY TO BE CERTIFIED. Appeal from Winneshieh Circuit Court. Action upon an account for merchandise sold and delivered. General denial and payment pleaded by defendants. Trial by jury, and judgment for defendants; plaintiffs appeal.

Action in chancery to set aside a deed of certain lands on the ground that it was executed with the fraudulent purpose of defeating the collection of a judgment recovered by plaintiff against the grantor, Michael Farrell. There was a decree granting the relief prayed for; defendant appeals.

<p> Appeal from Henry District Court. </p>

The plaintiff sued out an attachment, and caused certain property to be attached which the court released or discharged from the attachment, and the plaintiff appeals.

Action upon a promissory note. The defendant admitted the execution of the note, and pleaded a counter-claim. There was a trial without a jury, and j udgment was rendered for the plaintiff for the amount of the note. The defendant appeals.

Action to recover for personal injuries sustained by plaintiff, from a fall, caused by a defective sidewalk, of the city. Judgment upon a verdict was rendered for plaintiff. Defendant appeals. The case has before been in this court. See 66 Iowa, 216.

This is an action to recover the amount of a note for $1,800, and to foreclose a mortgage executed to secure the same. The cause was tried to the court, and the petition was dismissed. The plaintiff appeals. The facts are stated in the opinion.