just claim in Indiana

1995Accordingly, "[the true and just rule is, that the proportional value, and not the quantity of the several parts of the land, should be the measure of damages." Id.

1944Williams et al. v. Williams, Admr., et al. (1940), 217 Ind. 581 , 29 N. E. (2d) 557.

1913O’Connor v. Walter (1893), 37 Neb. 267 , 55 N. W. 867 , 40 Am.

1913O’Connor v. Walter (1893), 37 Neb. 267 , 55 N. W. 867 , 40 Am.

1905Co. v. Gaffney (1903), 76 Conn. 107 , 55 Atl. 582 ; Zarrs v. Keck (1894), 40 Neb. 456 , 58 N. W. 933 .

1905Co. v. Gaffney (1903), 76 Conn. 107 , 55 Atl. 582 ; Zarrs v. Keck (1894), 40 Neb. 456 , 58 N. W. 933 .

1905Co. v. Gaffney (1903), 76 Conn. 107 , 55 Atl. 582 ; Zarrs v. Keck (1894), 40 Neb. 456 , 58 N. W. 933 .

1905Co. v. Gaffney (1903), 76 Conn. 107 , 55 Atl. 582 ; Zarrs v. Keck (1894), 40 Neb. 456 , 58 N. W. 933 .

1905Stats., 1051, provides that whenever any laborer upon any railroad * * * shall have a just claim or demand for labor performed on such railroad, against any person being contractor on such railroad with the railroad company, such railroad company shall be liable to pay such laborer, etc. Held, that the words 'contractor with the railroad company’ do not necessarily restrict the remedy to claims against persons who have contracted directly and immediately with the company; but they may be understood as describing all persons who, by means of laborers in their employ, prosecute work upon the rai

1893From this amount he will also be entitled to deduct any sum to which he may have a just claim for use and occupation of his moiety enjoyed by the cotenant making the improvements.” In Alleman v. Hawley, 117 Ind. 532 (538), this court says: “The appellant’s right to compensation for her improvements is not a legal right, depending upon a statute, but is a right resting upon equitable principles, and one which a court of equity will enforce.” The cross-complaint pleaded a state of facts in relation to the occupancy of the land and the making of improvements, which gave him an equitable right to

1890In such case, either he or the purchaser at the execution sale must suffer loss ; and so far as the question has been considered, jt has been held, and perhaps wisely, that the loss, if any, falls on him, and that the purchaser, if he acted in good faith, takes title although the sale was without plaintiff’s knowledge, and realized a sum* less than the value of the property, and insufficient to satisfy the writ.” In the case of Johnson v. Murray, 112 Ind. 154 , it is held that the improvident issuing of a writ does not render it void, and the court says : “ If the writ is not void it must be a

1886This principle is a familiar one in this court, for it was declared in the early case of Fischli v. Fischli, 1 Blackf. 360 , and has been reaffirmed in a great number of cases.

1885Bodkin v. Merit, ante, p. 293; Short v. Sears, 93 Ind. 505 ; Hines v. Dresher, 93 Ind. 551 ; Carver v. Howard, 92 Ind. 173 ; Jones v. French, 92 Ind. 138 , and authorities cited.

1885Bodkin v. Merit, ante, p. 293; Short v. Sears, 93 Ind. 505 ; Hines v. Dresher, 93 Ind. 551 ; Carver v. Howard, 92 Ind. 173 ; Jones v. French, 92 Ind. 138 , and authorities cited.

1885Bodkin v. Merit, ante, p. 293; Short v. Sears, 93 Ind. 505 ; Hines v. Dresher, 93 Ind. 551 ; Carver v. Howard, 92 Ind. 173 ; Jones v. French, 92 Ind. 138 , and authorities cited.

1885Bodkin v. Merit, ante, p. 293; Short v. Sears, 93 Ind. 505 ; Hines v. Dresher, 93 Ind. 551 ; Carver v. Howard, 92 Ind. 173 ; Jones v. French, 92 Ind. 138 , and authorities cited.

1884Porter v. Mitchell, 82 Ind. 214 .

1862And this being done, the enactment, in its intent and purpose, would be consistent with the very just principle above stated, viz: “ That partnership property is in the first instance liable to partnership debts.” Against the construction thus given we are refered to Simmons v. Curtis,41 Maine 373 ; but, as that decision is founded upon a statutory enactment, in many respects, dissimilar to the one before us, we are not inclined to follow it.