|DESCRIPTIO PERSONÆ||360||DESIGNATIO JUSTICIARIORUM|
DESCREPTIO PERSONÆ. Lat. Description of the person. By this is meant a word or phrase used merely for the purpose of identifying or pointing out the person intended, and not as an intimation that the language in connection with which it occurs is to apply to him only in the official or technical character which might appear to be indicated by the word.
DESCRIPTION. 1. A delineation or account of a particular subject by the recital of its characteristic accidents and qualities.
2. A written enumeration of items oomposing an estate, or of its condition, or of titles ui- documents: like un inventory, but with more particularity, and without involving the idea of an appraisemciit.
3. An exact written account of an article, mechanical device, or process which is the subject of an application for a patent.
4. A method of pointing out 8. particular person by ri-ferrlng to his relationship to some other person or his character as an offlcer trustee, executor, etc.
5. That part of a conveyance, advertise ment of sale. etc., which identifies the land intended to be iillfected.
DESERT. To leave or quit with an intention to cause a permanent separation: to forsake urteily; to abandon.
DESETION. The act by which a person abandons and forsakes, without justification, or unauthorized, a station or condition of public or social life. renonncing its responsibilities and evading its duties.
In matrimonial and divorce law. An nctuni nbiinii iiment or breaking oi? of matrimonial coiiahitiition, by either of the parties. and a renouiicing or refusal of the duties and obligations of the relation, with an intent to abandon or forsake entirely and not to return to or resume marital relations, occurring without legal justification either in the consent or the wrongful conduct of the other party. State v. Baker, 112 La. 801, 36 South. 703: Bailey v. Bailey, 21 Grat. (Va.) 47; ingersoll v. lmersoll_ 49 Pa. 230, 88 Am. Dec. "-00; Droego v. Droege. 55 Mo. App. 482; Barnett v. Barnett, 27 Int}. App. 466. 61 N. E. '°'i': \'\'iliiams v. Villliianis, 130 N. Y. 193. ‘.9 N. E. 93. 14 L R. A. 220, 27 Am. St. Rep. 517; luagrath v. Magrath, 103 Mass. 579. 4 Am Rep. 579; Cass v. C-ass, 31 N. J. Eq.
‘; Ogllyle v. Ogilvie, 37 Or. 171. 61 Pac.
- Tiireli v. Tirrcil. 72 Conn. 567, 45 Ati.
153. 47 L R. A. 750; State v. Weber, 48 Mo. App. 504.
In military law. An offense which consists m the abandonment of his post and duties by a person commissioned or enlisted in the army or navy, without leave and with the intention not to return. i‘Ioiiin,-_:sworth v. Shaw, 19 Ohio St. 432, 2 Am. Rep. 411;
In re Sutherland (D. C.) 53 Fed. The is a difference between desertion and Sim]. “absence without leave ;" in order to afitiite the former, there must he an intenfln not to return to the service. lino-no 1, South Scitutite, 11:3 Mass. 336.
In maritime law. The act by which n seauian deseits and abandons 3 Ship or wassei, in which he had engaged to perform Q voyage, before the expiration of his Lina and without leave. By desertion_ in 1]; maritime law, is ineant, not a more unnulhib ized absence from the ship without lav; but an unauthorized absence from the ship. with an intention not to return to her uni ice, or, as it is often expressed. miimo nu rerericndi: that is, with an intention to b sert. Collin v. Jenkins, 3 Story, 108. Fat Gas. No. 2.948; The Union (D C.) 20 Fat. 539; The Mary C. Conery (D. C.) 9 Fed. 233 The George, 10 Fed. Cas. 204.
DESHONORA. In Spanish law. Dis- honor; injury; slander. Las Purtidas. pt. 7. tit. 9. i. 1, 6.
DESIGN. In the law of evidence. Pur-
pose or intention, combined with plan, or in}. plying 8. plan in the mind. Burrlli, C'_"£i Ev. 331; Suite v. Grant 36 Iowa, 216. 57: 3. W. 120; Ernest v. State, 20 Fla. 358; Iiiqu V. Suite. 36 Wis. 226.
As a term of art, the giving of a viulllu form to the conceptions of the mind, or iii- vention. Binns v. Woodruif. 4 Wash C. C 4S, Fed. Cos. No. 1,424.
In patent law. The drawing or depiction of an original plan or conception for a novel pattern, model, shape, or configuration, to be used in the manufacturing or textile aits or the fine arts, and chiefly of a decorative ur ornamental character. “Design patents" are contrasted with “utility patents." but eqnuily involve the exercise of the inventive or (whil- native faculty. Gorhnm Co. v. White. 14 WniL 524, 20 L. Ed. 73]; Maniifucturiu: Ca. V. Odell (D. C.) ls Fed. 321: Biuns v. Woul- rufif. 3 Fed. Cris. 424; Henderson v. Tomp- kins (C. C.) 60 Fed. 758.
“Design. in the view of the patent law, is that characteristic of 8. physical suhsmnne which, by means of lines, ilJ.ia:.,'es_ coriiigurntvu. nnd the like, taken as a whule. makes an in- pression, through the eye, upon the mind of tin observer. The essence of a design resides, not in the elements individually, nor in their method of arrangement, but in the tout ensoniblu-——i’ii that indefinable whole that uwakens some wi- sation in the observer's mind. lmprewions "Ill imparted may be complex or simple: in nne ii mingled impression of gracefulncss and stray! ii, in another the impression of strength sins But whatever the impression, there is nttneéud in the mind of the observer. to the object sh served, a Sense of uniqueness and characicr." Pelouze Scale Co. v. American Cutlery Co., E Fed. 918, -B C. C. A. 52.
Designntio justiciariornin en in regs] jut-isdictio vex-o ordinarin 3 loge. 4 Inst.
74. The appointment of justices is by the