Page:Black's Law Dictionary (Second Edition).djvu/107

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page needs to be proofread.


ASSOCIATION

the justices nnd seigeants for the purposes of taking the assises. 3 Bl. Comm. 59. 60. —Artie1es of association. See A31'1cLus.—- National banking associations. The statutory title of corporations organized for the purpose of carrying on the businr-ss of banking under the laws of the United Stnles. Reg. St. U. S. 5 5133 (U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 3-1.14).

{{anchor+|.|ASSOCIE EN NOM. In French Law. In a xoriéié en conuzmndité an assucié en nzml is one who is liable for the engagements ot the undi.-rt..1kin,g to the whole extent, of his property. This e.\*presslon arises from the fan that the names or the asaociés so liable ngure in the firm-name or form part of the iuuiélé en nom oollectif. Arg. Er. Mere. Law, 516.

{{anchor+|.|ASSOIL. To absolve; acquit; to set free;

in deliver irom excommunication. St. 1 Hen. iV. c. 1'; Cowell. {{anchor+|.|ASSOILZIE. in Scotch law. To acquit

Lbe deleullnnt in an action; to find a crimi- ual not guilty.

{{anchor+|.|ASSUME. To undertake; engage; prom- lsc. 1 Ld. ltaym. 12:; 4 Uolle, 92. To take upon one’s self. 5 ringer v. De Wolf, 194 Ill. 2218. ('32 N. E. 542. 56 L. R. A. 465, 88 Am. st. iiep. 155.

{{anchor+|.|ASSUMPSIT. Lat. He undertook; he promised. A promise or engagement by lihhril one person assumes or undertakes to do some act or pay something to another. it may be either oral or in nritim, but is not muler seal. it. is express it the promisor puts his engagement in (hstinct and definite lu.i.'a-nge; it IS implied wiiere the law infers .1 promise (though no iormai one has passed) f|'ui.1J the conduct, of the party or the cir- cumstances of the case.

In practice. A form of action which lies [or the recovery of damages for the non-pertonuiuce of a pawl or simple contlnct; or

1 contract that is neither of record nor under seal. 7 ’lcrm. 351; Baiiard v. “alker,

5 Johns. Gas. (N. Y.) 60.

'llne ordinary division of this action is into (1) common or imlebiiams ussuinpsii‘. brought for the most part on an implied promise; und (3 special u.y.sump.s-it, founded no nn -arpress promise. Steph. P1. 11, 1.3.

Tile action of assumpsit differs from trespuw and trover, which are founded on a tort. not upon a contract; from covenant and dslli, which are appropriate where the ground of rccovery is a scaled instrument, or special oblicition to pay a fixed sum; nnd from nvrlrrin, which seeks the recovery of specific in (party. it attainable, rather than on‘. dam- up a.

—Impl.ied nssnmpsit. An undertaking or mouse not formally mfidc, but presumed or Irltlled from the Lnnduct of a p'u-tv. WiIlen— borg v. iilinois Cent. R. Co.. 11 Iii. App. 302.-— Specisl esuunpsit. An action of uaunvpsit

99

{{anchor+|.|ASSURANCE

is so called where the declaration sets out t.be precise language or effect of a special contract. which forms the ground of action; as distin- gulshed from a yencml aesumpstt in which Lbe technical claim is for a debt alleged to grow out of the contract, not the ngreemcnt itseif_

{{anchor+|.|ASSUMPTION. The act or agreement of B assuming or taking upon one's seli; the nu- dertaking or adoption of a debt or obligation primarily resting upon another, as where the purchaser of real estate ‘assumes’ a moat.- guge resting upon it. in which case he adopts the mortgage debt as his own and becomes personally liable for its payment. ggleston v. Morrison, 84 Ili. App. 6'31; Locke v. Hom- er. 131 Mass. 93. 41 An). Rep. 199; Springer v. De W01f. 191 I11. 218, 62 N. E. 5-12, 56 L. R. A. 465. 88 Am. St. Rep. 155; Lenz v. Railroad Co., 111 Wis. 198. 86 N. W. (307.

The diiference between the purchaser of land assuming a mortgage on it and simply buying subject to the mortgage. IS that in the former case he makes himselli personally iiable for the payment of the morugo.-;e debt, while in the lat ter Lase he does not. llancock v. Fieming, 10‘!

lnd. 533. 3 N. E. 204; Brsman v. Douse. 12 Cush. (Mass) 227.

C

D

Where one “assumes" a lease, he takes to himself the ohiigations, contracts, agreements, and benefits to which the other contracting party was entitled under the terms of the icase. Cincinnati, etc. R. Co. v indi- ann, eta, R. Co.. 44 Ohio St. 287, 314. 7 N. E. 152.

—Assumptinn of risk. A term or condition 6 II] a contract of empioyment. either express or imphcd from the circumstances of the employ- menl, by which the empioye ugrees that dangers of injury ordinariiy or olniousiy incident to the discharge of his duty in the particular employ- ment shall be at his own risk. Narramore r. Railway Co.. 98 Fed. 301. 37 C. U. A. 491). 48 L. It. . ()3; Fanikner v. Mining Co.. 2. Utah. -137. 60 Pac. 799; ltuiirond Co. 17. Ton cy.,I}':' Ark. 209. 54 S. W. 577. 11' Am. St. Rep. IUD; I. die v. Railway (‘o.. 61 S. C. 468. 59 S. E. 1'15: Martin v. Railroad Co.. 1l8 Iowa, 148. 91 §'IhW. 10:54, 59 L R. A. 693, 96 Am. St. Rep. I

{{anchor+|.|ASSURANCE. In conveyancing. A deed or instrument of conveyance. The le- gal evidences of the transfer of property are in England cailcd the “common assurances" J of the kingdom, whereby every man's estate is assured to him, and ail controversies. doubts, and diflicuities are either prevented or removed. 2 Bl. Comm. 204. State v. Farrand. 8 N. J. Law. 333.

In contracts. A making secure; 1nsur- K once. The term was formcriy of very fre- quent. use in the modern sense of insllraime. purtrcularly in Lnglish inzulirlme law, nnd still appears in the policies of some compa- nies. lmt is otherwise seldom seen of late years. There seems to be a tendency. how ever, to use assurance for the contracts of life insurance companies, and in.m1'a.>we for risks upon property.

Assurance. further, covenant for. See

Covmumr. M