Show OPINIONS FROM SUPREME COURT COURT lower Court Reversed In Case Caso of State vs Candland EtAl EAI I A AFFECTS Y SENTENCE I Ut tour LoWer II IIII iu iuS S II ci Trute rut e s Ab IsIl 11 L Th The supreme court today loday handed town down two o o opinIons one n a reversal and tm th other r on an of oC tIme the Judgment or oC the tho lower courts rho tit opinion tOt for Ihs thIs term of oC court was I a reversal or of ortha time tha Ju judgment lent of oC the tho lower court In the case ot of the tho of Utah Vi vs W D I one and Webb Oreon Orel appellants the t corda ot of the cuo caa show that ono omme onoS S B 1 P Money was or of an ot of tenno fenno before Judge Johnson In county and to nt In the Iho sin state Ie Mt 1 ip ll i wa as taken to the supreme court and An lt up peal wa was with the am Green n as sureties jhc supreme court hll heiti that thi lh con and or of WIB wan I ii legal and void la time the that the tho trial court ts Its After the 1 as n a anew nl new WIS won lel flied lot lotrey roy rey Illon his failure tu to appear for Cor trIal hi bond ond wn was forfeited anti 1 action WUI SU against tie de tu recover the of the hOlt bond lime fhe court below Lolow judg Iii favor tavor of time the state for Cor the tul full amount ot of the tho boOth ant on an Up UI veal Wa was tt to lie court courtIn courtIn In tile opinion or of time the coUrt which hl h Wil written by I it is Id link that nl ot of th of tl timi hOld were sere violated by defendants 1111 anti the trial court erred In holding the lure sure sureties tes ties TIme he rO I wai accordingly reversed remanded Ins to the tho court balow t judg macat In favor of nt The fhe oln anti Ion was Judge Jart JartIn hart hartIn 1 In by Justice Baskin In time the cale case ot of Frank J 1 trus tru In of Mathews VI V Abigail Ij fJ appellant th supreme court tilt judgment Of nr thin the lower court TIme The action Uon I WM bro broUght by to 10 set et naldo mind lull null deemi to certain real ol nail It r property In this I city I executed hy by Mathew to hil ImIs wife appellant herein on th thai ground that the can Conveyance was 0 fraud and made for tor tle the purpose or of placIng time the property out Ir of reach of hi his mt lower court heh held that tl II was and directed that the attempted to he hc be as a or of the banI 10 lon estate I Time court affirms this lUd jud meat ment In nn an opInion handed today oda odaI by and concurred 11 iii I by I Jt tro Justice Da amid Hart In tH th opInion It l Is held that such n a convey coney under time ot of this Is auth coMe In vili he be lucid held void ulel Oi as to existing wi without proof prof of oC fraud |