« НазадПродовжити »
ABATEMENT AND REVIVAL.
ment to which they were chartered, the accounts
Abatement, see “Abatement and Revival.”
Jurisdiction of courts, see “Courts.”
Laches, see “Equity,” .
Litmitation by statute, see “Limitation of Ae-
Pendency of action, see “Abatement and Re-
Actions between parties in particular relations.
Actions by or against particular classes of
Particular causes or grounds of action.
Claim against school district, see “Schools and
Death caused by operation of railroad, see
Death Of passenger, see “Carriers,” § 3.
Death of servant, see “Master and Servant,”
Infringement Of patent, see “Patents,” § 5.
and Tenant,” § 1.
Personal injuries, see “Carriers,” § 3; “Elec-
Price of goods, see “Sales,” § 2.
Dissilution of corporation, see “Corporations,”
See “Limitation of Actions."
§ 1. Nature and requisites.
Where an occupant of land without color of title attorned to another who made entry from the state of a definite tract including the land so occupied, and agreed to hold possessmn of
*Point annotated. See syllabus.
Immigration regulations, see “Commerce,” § i
Laws relating to immigration_as _deny1ng du process of law, see “Constitutlonal Law, § 6.
§ 1. Immigration. In the provision of the immigration act (afi Feb. 29, 1907, c. 1134, § 3, 34 Stat. 809), ma
ARBITRATION AND AWARD.
§ 1. Submission.
A written contract inter partes, as an agreement for arbitration stating questions to be submitted and determined must primarily be interpreted by its language taken in its ordinary and accepted meaning, and if that language is plain and unambiguous in itself there is no room for construction, but it,will be held to mean precisely what its terms imply.—In re Southern Pac. Co. (C. C.) 1001.
An arbitration of diflerences between an interstate carrier and its employés under Act June 1, 1898, c. 370, 30 Stat. 424 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 3205], is essentially a common-law arbitration, and rests solely on the written agreement of arbitration entered into by the parties, which limits and determines not only the rights of the parties thefeto, but also the extent of the powers of the arbitrators—In re Southern Pac. 00. (O. C.) 1001.
An agreement for arbitration under Act June 1. 1898, c. 370, 30 Stat. 424 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 3205], between a railroad company and the Order of Railroad Telegraphers, construed with respect to the scope of certain questions thereby submitted—In re Southern Pac. Co. (0. O.) 1001.
§ 2. Arbitrators and proceedings.
Mere statements made by one claiming ownership of certain stock of a corporation that, if he recovered it, he would use or dispose of it for the benefit of the corporation, did not constitute a transfer which entitled the corporation to notice of a hearing by arbitrators to determine the ownership of the stock under an agreement to which it was not a party.——Duvall v. Sulzner (C. C.) 910.
§ 3. Award.
*An allegation that arbitrators acted “with manifest unfairness and with such partiality as to destroy the judicial character of the proceedings” does not state any ground for impeachment of their award, in the absence of any allegation that the party benefited participated in any misconduct or was guilty of fraud or collusion—Duvall v. Sulzner (C. C.) 910.
A party to an arbitration agreement held to have waived the right to notice of the hearing before the arbitrators and to object to the consideration of evidence not legally admissible.— Duval v. Sulzner (C. C.) 910.
A party to an arbitration agreement who voluntarily joins in the selection of persons as arbitrators who are known to have formed opinions upon the merits of the controversy cannot impeach the award on the ground that the arbitrators were not impartial.-—-Duvall v. Sulzner (O. C.) 910.
Here statements made by one claiming ownership of certain stock of a corporation, that if he recovered it he would use or dispose of it for the benefit of the corporation, did not constitute a transfer which entitled the corporation to notice of a hearing by arbitrators to de
‘Point annotated. See syllabus.
termine the ownership of the stock under 9.1 agreement to which it was not a party.—Duvall v. Sulzner (C. C.) 910.
In an arbitration proceeding to settle differences between an interstate carrier and it employés under Act June 1, 1898, c. 370, 30 Stat. 424 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 3205], where exceptions to the award are taken. the Circuit COurt cannot enter judgment until the appeal provided for by section 4 has been de termined or the time for such appeal has expired.——In re Southern Pac. Co. (C. G.) 1001.
ARMY AND NAVY.
The provision of Rev. St. § 5438 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 3674], making it an offense tc knowingly purchase or receive in pledge from any soldier any public property which such soldier has no lawful right to sell or pledge, construed—United States v. Koplik (O. O.) 919.
It is not a. defense to a. prosecution under Rev. St. .5 5438 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 3674], for receiving in pledge public property from a soldier, that such property consisted of clothing which the soldier had paid for out of his cloth~ gag allowance—United States v. Koplik (C. C.)
Of compensation for property taken for pub
lic use, see “Eminent Domain,’ § . On stock in national bank, see “Banks 8.1K Banking," § 1.
ASSIGNMENT OF ERRORS.
See “Appeal and Error,” § 5.
Fraud as to creditors, see “Fraudulent Con veyances.” In bankruptcy, see “Bankruptcy,” § 3.
Transfers of particular species of property, rights, or instruments.
See “Copyrights,” § 1; “Trade-Marks am Trade-Names,” § 2.
ASSIGNMENTS FOR BENEFIT OF CREDITORS.
ASSUMPSIT, ACTION OF.
See “Account Stated”; “Work and Labor.”