Ruch v. Rock Island
97 U.S. 693 (1878)

Annotate this Case

U.S. Supreme Court

Ruch v. Rock Island, 97 U.S. 693 (1878)

Ruch v. Rock Island

97 U.S. 693

Syllabus

1. It is not necessary to the admissibility of a deposition, offered to prove the evidence given at a former trial by a witness who is now dead, that the deponent shall be able to give the exact language of such witness. The substance is all that the law requires, and the deponent may, in order to refresh his memory, recur to his notes taken at the trial.

2. Morgan v. Railroad Company,96 U. S. 716, wherein the law of Illinois touching dedications of real property is discussed, cited and approved.

3. The breach of conditions subsequent which are not followed by a limitation over to a third person does not, ipso facto, work a forfeiture of the freehold estate to which they are annexed. It only vests in the grantor or his heirs a right of action which cannot be transferred to a stranger, but which they, without an actual entry or a previous demand, can enforce by a suit for the land.

The facts are stated in the opinion of the Court.

Official Supreme Court caselaw is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia caselaw is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.