RECENT CASES. 341 Negligence — Defective Highways — Liability of Abutters. — A city charter provided that it should be the duty of lot-owners to keep the sidewalks ad- joining their lots in repair. It also provided that in case of a failure so to do the city should repair, at the expense of the abutter. Held, that the lot-owners were not liable to individuals for injuries from defective sidewalks, but only to the city for repairs, and therefore, though the city was compelled to pay damages to the individual, it could not recover the amount from the abutter. Cily of Rochester v, Campbell, 25 N. K Rep. 937 (N. Y.). Nuisance. — In an action to recover damages for maintaining a fertilizer factory from which noxious gases escape into the plaintiff's premises, it is not proper to submit to the jury the questions whether the location of the factory is convenient and proper for carrying on the business, and whether such use of the property is a reasonable one. It is immaterial that a large amount of capital is invested in similar factories in the immediate neighborhood, Susquehanna Fertilizer Co, v, Malone, 20 Atl. Rep. 900 (Md.). The opinions in Tipping v. Smelting Co., 11 H. L. C, 642, are cited at length as exact statements of the law. See also Bohan v. Port Jervis Gas Co., 25 N. E. Rep. 246 (N. Y.), which decides that a gas company incorporated under the laws of New York cannot carry on its business so as to render adjoining property unfit for comfortable enjoyment, though all possible care is used to render the business inoffensive. Property — Attachment — Sale of Perishable Property, — A purchaser at a sale of attached property, sold by order of the court as perishable, acquires title free from a landlord's lien which was prior to the attachment. The court puts this on the necessity of such a rule in order to obtain a fair price at such sale. Betterton v, Eppstein, 14 S. W. Rep. 861 (Tex.). Quasi Contracts — Payment by Mistake — Negligence. — Where a pay- ment in excess of the amount due is made by a debtor under a mistake of fact which ordinary diligence in looking up his receipts would have removed, the money cannot be recovered back. Brummitt v. McGuire, 12 S. E. Rep. 191 (N. C). Real Property — Breach of Covenant of Warranty — Measure of Dam- ages OF Remote Vendee. — Held, a vendee who has lost his land by reason of a title paramovmt to that of his remote vendor is not limited in his recovery from such re- mote vendor for breach of warranty, to the amount which such vendee paid for the land, but may recover the amount which such remote vendor received for the land. Brooks V. Blacky 8 So. Rep. 332 (Miss.). Real Property — Deeds — Defective Acknov^ti^edgment. — An officer who has made a defective certificate of a married woman's acknowledgment of a deed cannot correct the defect. There must be a reacknowledgment. The officer's term had expired, but he still held the office, by virtue of a re-election. Griffith v. VentresSy 8 So. Rep. 312 (Ala.). Real Property — Deeds — Delivery. — A father conveyed an estate in land to his infant daughter in fee, and had the deed recorded, but thereafter kept it in his possession. Held, that the delivery of the deed to the registrar for record, and the re- cording thereof, was sufficient to pass the title to the grantee, and that the father should not be allowed to testify that he never intended to make an absolute conveyance. Annis v. Wilson, 25 Pac. Rep. 304 (Col.). Real Property — Deeds — Delivery to Registrar. — The grantee of a deed delivered it to the registrar to be recorded. Through his negligence it was not recorded. The grantor subsequently conveyed the same land to a bona fide purchaser, who had examined the record and found no entry of the prior deed. Held, that the bona fide purchaser could not be charged with constructive notice of the unrecorded deed, and therefore took a perfect title. Ritchie v. Griffiths, 25 Pac. Rep. 341 (Wash.). Real Property — Delivery of Deeds. — The plaintiff's mother being very ill and fearing death made a deed by which she granted to the plaintiff her interest in certain land. The deed was given to the plaintiff, but it was the grantor's intention, and was so agreed by the plaintiff, that the deed should not take effect at all, except in case of the grantor's death. The mother recovered, and the defendant claimed the land in question, under a subsequent judgment against her and an execution sale.
