Notes of Cases*
ANIMALS. (Liability of rabid dog's owner.) N. Y.—A dog afflicted with rabies caused the death of a cow. The cow's owner sued the dog's owner for the value of the bitten animal. In Van Etten v. Noyes, 112 New York Suppl. 888, the Supreme Court of New York held that as no evidence was adduced to show the owner's knowledge of the dog's vicious disposition no recovery could be had. While it is true that the owner of domestic animals, such as cattle, is generally liable for their entry upon the land of another, the owner of a dog is not liable in trespass every time it goes upon another's premises. Injury from the bite of a rabid dog must be classed with those forms of inevitable accident which the law always leaves where they chance to fall, because, as no one was in default, there is no basis for assessment of damages against any one. ARSON. (Burning of dwelling-house of wife by husband.) Wis.—The common law offense of arson, which is much like that of Wisconsin, consists of feloniously burning the dwelling-house of another. The wife of the accused began a divorce action, secured a deed from him to the house, and dwelt alone therein. Thereafter he applied a brand to the structure. In Kopcyznski v. State, 118 N. W. Rep. 863, it was insisted that a hus band, living with his wife in a dwelling-house which she owns and they both occupy, is not capable of committing the crime of arson by burning it. The Supreme Court of Wis consin held that a married man can commit the crime by burning the home of his wife with whom he is not living and from which he had been excluded, or had excluded him self, and the question of in whom the title to the property rests is immaterial. BANKRUPTCY. (Attorney who collected money before he was engaged for bankrupt estate.)—In Matter of Martin 6r» Co., 20 Am. B. R. 705, it has been held that where an •Copies of the pamphlet Reporters containing full reports of any of these decisions which are cited in the National Reporter System may be secured from the West Publishing Company, St. Paul, Minnesota, at 25 cents each In ordering, the title of the desired case should be given as well as the citation of volume and page of the Reporter in which it is printed.
attorney-at-law collects a sum of money on a claim placed in his hands before he is engaged for a bankrupt estate, he is required, in the absence of fraud, to pay it to the client for whom he made the collection, notwith standing he received it during the time he is employed for the estate. BANKRUPTCY. (Jurisdiction when cor porations are organized in different states.)— A California corporation was organized with the object of becoming the successor of a Washington corporation, taking over its prop erty and assuming its obligations; had its home office in Oakland, Cal., but the business was conducted by a manager at Tacoma, who was also the manager of the Washington cor poration; the business transactions of both corporations were so intermingled that a separation of the two concerns in bankruptcy would be impossible. It was held, In re Alaska-American Fish Co., 20 Am. B. R. 712. that the bankruptcy court in Washington, having first acquired jurisdiction of both corporations, had the right to deal with them as joint parties. BOYCOTTS. (If enforced by legal means courts will not interfere.) Mont.—In Lind say &" Co. v. Montana Federation of Labor, recently decided, the Supreme Court of Montana holds that the distribution of a circular urging all laboring men and persons in sympathy with organized labor to with hold patronage from the plaintiffs, is not illegal, for the plaintiffs had no property right in the trade of any particular person, and "although decisions exist which make the same act lawful when done by one per son unlawful when done by several, on the theory that concerted action amounts to a conspiracy," an individual clothed with a right when acting alone "does not lose such right merely by acting with others, each of whom has the same right. . . If a labor organization employs a boycott, the means of its enforcement being legal, the courts cannot assist the persons boycotted." CIVIL SERVICE LAW. (Quo warranto proceedings of attorney-general necessary to show breach.) Mass.— In a petition to the Supreme Judicial Court, George H. Foster,
