insured; that under Section 4959, Compiled Laws of 1913, the cashier by virtue of such fact became the agent of the insurance company to all intents and purposes, and that since he had knowledge that the interest of the insured in the real property was that of a lessee and that the buildings were personalty, this knowledge was chargeable to the insurance company; and that therefore it must be held to have waived the stipulation which otherwise would have voided the policy.
Hendrickson v. Stewart: Land was sold at foreclosure sale on April 21, 1924. In the fall of 1924, defendant, with knowledge of the foreclosure, but expecting the mortgagor to redeem, made an oral lease with the mortgagor to plow and crop the land in 1925. In good faith, he sowed crops of winter rye and spring wheat, the wheat being sown three weeks before the period of redemption expired, and prior to seeding he was informed by the plaintiff that if no redemption was made, plaintiff would crop the land. A sheriff’s deed was issued April 25, 1925, and an action was brought by the owner thereunder to quiet title. HELD: That the lessee from the mortgagor acquired greater right in the premises than the lessor held and that since the crops did not mature until after the issuance of the sheriff's deed, the lessee is not the owner thereof as against the holder of the deed. The holder of the deed immediately after it was acquired had all the rights of an owner.
U. S. SUPREME COURT DECISIONS
The Federal Court which decrees a foreclosure of a mortgage of railroad property retains jurisdiction of an. ancillary suit brought by the mortgagee against third parties to determine the validity of an alleged contract by which a previous owner had obligated itself forever to maintain its general offices and shops in Anderson County.—Central Union Trust Co. vs. Anderson County, 45 Sup. Ct. Rep. 427.
****
In a suit to foreclose a lien on water rights of particular purchasers under a contract to reclaim land segregated from the public domain, by virtue of the Carey Act, where the project has failed for insufficient water, the holders of other water rights under the contract are necessary parties to the suit and must be included.—Commonwealth Trust Co. vs. Smith. 45 Sup. Ct. Rep. 26.
****
In a suit by a fraternal organization against individual members to enjoin the collection of claims having a single origin, and which are alleged to have been brought pursuant to a conspiracy to injure the plaintiff, the amount in controversy for purposes of determining federal jurisdiction is the aggregate amount of the claims. ae wooden of the World vs. O'Neill, 45 Sup. Ct. Rep. 49,
