RED LIGHT ABATEMENT LAW (Continued).

the act does not undertake to provide for a judgment abating a nuisance otherwise than as against persons who are properly joined as defendants in the action and brought in by proper process. (People v. Casa Co., 194.)

2. NUISANCE-ABATEMENT-LACK OF ACTUAL KNOWLEDGE BY PROPERTY OWNER-FORFEITURES.-The suppression of a nuisance is essentially a proceeding in rem, operating upon the property used in the mainteuance of the nuisance, and while the owner having no actual knowledge of the character of the business carried on in his building might personally be bound for the costs, the building and furniture may nevertheless be proceeded against and subjected to the forfeitures prescribed by the statute. (Id.)

3. ABATEMENT ACT-Closing of Building for One Year.—The provision of the red light abatement law permitting the building to be closed and kept closed against its use for any purpose for one year unless sooner released in the manner provided by law is not unconstitutional and invalid, as being unduly harsh, unreasonable, and oppressive, and in effect a penalty. (Id.)

4. CONTEMPT-UNNECESSARY PROVISION.-The provision of section 6 of the abatement act in regard to punishment for contempt is not a necessary or inseparable part of the act, and may be eliminated therefrom and the remainder of the statute treated as valid. (Id.) 5. ACTION BY PRIVATE CITIZEN-VALIDITY OF ACT.-The abatement act is not objectionable as special legislation in providing for and permitting the institution and maintenance of the action by an individual citizen without a showing that he is especially damaged, since a multiplicity of suits is thereby prevented, and the same being a matter of legislative discretion not reviewable by the courts. (Id.)

6. ACT NOT IN NATURE OF BILL OF ATTAINDER.-The abatement law is not in the nature of a bill of attainder, since the object of the law is not to punish, but to effect a reformation of the property, and for the further reason that there is no forfeiture of property. (Id.)

7. CONSTITUTIONAL LAW-POLICE POWER.-The fourteenth amendment to the federal constitution does not affect or in any manner curtail the police power of the state, and all owners hold their property subject to such police power and to such reasonable conditions as may be deemed by the governing authority essential to the public safety, comfort, and health. (Id.)

REIMBURSEMENT. See Workmen's Compensation Act, 11.

RELEASE. See Contract, 9, 10.

REMEDY. See Judgment, 3.

REPORTS. See Mining Corporations, 1.

REPUTATION. See Evidence, 2.

RESCISSION

1. SALE OF HORSES-RESCISSION OF CONTRACT-FRAUD-INSUFFICIENT OFFER TO RETURN-DIFFERENT LOCATION.-Rescission of a contract of sale of horses on the ground of false representations as to soundness and age is not effected by the giving of a notice that the horses were at a certain stable subject to the vendor's order, the horses having been delivered to the vendee at the vendor's ranch. (Cohn v. Harada, 5.)

2. TRIAL-INSTRUCTIONS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THEORY OF CASE.-An instruction as to what will authorize a rescission is not prejudicial when a case is tried upon the theory of a rescission, although the issue of rescission is not raised by the pleadings. (Burrell v. Southern Cal. C. Co., 162.)

See Contract, 7, 17, 20; Findings, 1, 6.

RES JUDICATA. See Judgment, 1.

RETURN. See Dismissal, 4.

REVOCATION. See Dedication, 7.

ROAD COMMISSIONERS. See Constitutional Law, 7.

SALES.

1. MANUFACTURE OF MACHINERY FOR SPECIFIC PURPOSE-WARRANTYWAIVER OF OBJECTION.-Where a purchaser of appliances manufactured for use in canning fruit uses them during the canning season and makes no objection to their fitness until sued for the contract price, such objection comes too late. (Burrell v. Southern Cal. C. Co., 162.)

2. ACTION FOR PRICE COUNTERCLAIM

DAMAGES FOR INABILITY TO USE REMAINDER OF PLANT EVIDENCE.-In an action to recover the price of machinery and appliances manufactured for use for a specific purpose, damages by way of counterclaim for loss sustained by the purchaser through inability to use the remainder of defendant's manufacturing plant to its full capacity were too remote, and evidence to show such damage was properly excluded. (Id.)

3. INSTRUCTIONS-MEANING OF TECHNICAL TERMS.-The court had the right to instruct the jury as to the meaning of the words "perfectly constructed mechanically," those words having a technical meaning,

SALES (Continued).

and the court having left it to the jury to determine whether certain appliances in question were so constructed. (Id.)

4. SALE OF GRAIN BAGS-DEMAND FOR DELIVERY-TENDER OF PRICEWHEN NOT REQUIRED.—In an action for damages for refusal to make full delivery of grain bags under an agreement to sell and deliver, it is unnecessary for the complaint to allege a tender of the price of the undelivered bags, where it is fairly inferable from the allegations of the complaint that the defendants were doing business in a different place from where the bags were located, since it is unnecessary that actual payment or offer of payment accompany a demand for delivery, where the goods are not present at the time of demand. (Donlon v. Meyer, 225.)

5. REFUSAL OF DEFENDANTS TO DELIVER-ACCRUAL OF CAUSE OF ACTION -PERFORMANCE OR OFFER OF PERFORMANCE NOT REQUIRED.-In an action for damages for failure to make full delivery of grain bags under an agreement to sell and deliver, where it appears from the allegations of the complaint that in response to a demand for delivery subsequent to the time when delivery was due under the agreement, the defendants notified plaintiffs they would make no other or further delivery under the terms of the original agreement, the plaintiffs' cause of action accrued without the necessity of performance or offer of performance. (Id.)

6. EXTENSION OF TIME FOR DELIVERY-UNEXECUTED ORAL AGREEMENT -ASSERTION OF INVALIDITY · DEFENDANTS NOT ESTOPPED.-In an action for failure to make full delivery of grain bags under a written agreement to sell and deliver, where it is found that the time for delivery was extended by an unexecuted oral agreement, at the request and for the convenience of the defendants, the defendants are not estopped from asserting that they are not bound by the agreement, in the absence of any allegation of fraud on the part of the defendants. (Id.)

See Agency, 7; Guaranty, 1; Pleading, 1; Rescission, 1.

-

SATISFACTION OF JUDGMENT. PROMISSORY NOTE SETTLEMENT OF ACTION - FRAUD-SUFFICIENCY OF EVIDENCE.-Order denying motion to compel entry of satisfaction of judgment affirmed on authority of Edwards et al. v. Gear et al., ante, p. 602. (Herron v. Gear, 810.)

SCHOOL LAW.

HEALTH AND DEVELOPMENT SUPERVISION ACT-POWERS OF SCHOOL BOARDS-EMPLOYMENT OF OPTOMETRIST.-Under the act of 1909 (Stats. 1909, p. 908), authorizing boards of school trustees and city boards of education to establish health and development supervision in the public schools, and to employ an examining staff and other

SCHOOL LAW (Continued).

employees necessary to carry on such work, and under subdivision 21 of section 1617 of the Political Code, authorizing such boards to give diligent care to the health and physical education of pupils and to employ properly certified persons for such work, the boards are vested with a discretion to adopt the entire scheme, or only a portion of it, such as employing an optometrist, keeping in view the necessities of the situation and the finances of the district. (Beard V. Webb, 332.)

SELF-DEFENSE. See Criminal Law, 16.

SERVICE. See Pleading, 4.

SETTLEMENT. See Promissory Note, 3.

SHERIFF. See Attachment, 2.

STATE. See Actions, 1.

STATE AGRICULTURAL SOCIETY. See Constitutional Law, 1-3.

STATUTE OF FRAUDS. See Agency, 1-4.

STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS.

ACTION ON BOND OF NOTARY PUBLIC.-An action against the surety on the bond of a notary public for damages sustained through reliance upon a false certificate of acknowledgment is barred in three years from the date of the acknowledgment, as section 338, subdivision 1, of the Code of Civil Procedure is applicable to such an action. (Peterson v. Title Guaranty & Surety Co., 103.)

See Assault, 2; Negligence, 2.

STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION.

INTERPRETATION OF WORDS.-The words of a statute must be interpreted according to their common acceptation, and where a word having a technical as well as a popular meaning is used in a statute, the courts will accord to it its popular signification.

STIPULATION.

(Perrin v. Miller, 129.)

APPORTIONMENT OF RECOVERIES IN ATTACHMENT ACTIONS-FAILURE OF JUDGMENT CREDITOR TO DOCKET JUDGMENT-RIGHT TO SHARE IN PROCEEDS OF SALE OF DOCKETED JUDGMENT.-Where the attorneys for the respective plaintiffs in two different attachment actions against the same defendant enter into a stipulation providing that all recoveries or avails effected in either action shall be ratably appor

STIPULATION (Continued).

tioned between the plaintiffs according to the respective amounts of their claims or according to the respective amounts of the judgments rendered and entered in said actions, there is no implied duty that either party should docket the judgment obtained by him in the county where the property is situated so as to acquire a lien thereon; and where one of the parties does so docket his judgment and thus becomes a redemptioner, and the other party fails to so docket his judgment, and a third judgment creditor purchases the first judg ment, the failure of the second judgment creditor to so docket his judgment is not such a breach of the stipulation as to destroy his right to share in the amount paid for the first judgment. (Cordes v. Harding, 41.)

STOCKHOLDER. See Corporation Law, 4.

STREET LAW.

1. STREET ASSESSMENT OPENING OF STREET UNDER ACT OF 1903-PROCEEDINGS OF CITY COUNCIL-WHEN CONCLUSIVE.-In view of section 19 of the Street Opening Act of 1903 (Stats. 1903, p. 376), providing that the action of the city council upon objections to assessments shall be final and conclusive, an assessment must be sustained unless it be shown that the council refused to decide, upon the merits, the objections urged against the assessment, and instead thereof willfully based its order upon illegal considerations which were inconsistent with making an assessment in proportion to benefits to be derived from the improvement, and which in effect amounted to fraud upon the rights of the property owner. (Nutting v. City' of Los Angeles, 519.)

2. ACTION TO AVOID ASSESSMENT-FAIRNESS OF CITY COUNCIL.-In this action by a property owner to have an assessment for streetopening proceedings declared void, to enjoin the collection of the assessment, and to have the title of his property quieted against the same, it is held that the record wholly fails to establish the charge that the city council acted wrongfully and illegally, or that the assessment resulted from anything other than an honest attempt to make it in proportion to benefits. (Id.)

3. STREET ASSESSMENT-OPENING OF STREET UNDER ACT OF 1903-PROCEEDINGS OF CITY COUNCIL WHEN CONCLUSIVE.-Judgment reversed on authority of Nutting v. City of Los Angeles et al., ante, p. 519. (Fitzwilliam v. Los Angeles, 807.)

4. STREET ASSESSMENT-Opening of STREET UNDER ACT OF 1903-PROCEEDINGS OF CITY COUNCIL WHEN CONCLUSIVE.-Judgment reversed on authority of Nutting v. City of Los Angeles et al., ante, p. 519. (Murphy v. Los Angeles, 808.)

85 Cal. App.-56