| Show 6 S1iITUll S CR OPINIONS Fourteen ofThem Were Rendered Yesterclay Afternoon i I THEBEAEEIVEE CANAL CASE I Sine Thousand Dollars Damage in the HanncjuauEarrick Partnership Tiutic Irun Company Not Negligent Acalnst the Oregon Short LineRio Grande Western Must Pay frank Leak for the Loss of His Leg The supreme court met at 2 oclock yesterday afternoon insteaa of at 10 ain a-in as was intended It was 230 before the judges got down to business but r when they did get under way they dispensed dis-pensed Justice in the shape of deferred I opinions at a 210 gait All the judges were present viz Chief Justice Zane Associate Justices Miner Smith and r Bartch Opinions were rendered in the following cases L ASSIGNMENT is VOID John 0 Smith et al vs A F Sipperly ct al appellants appeal from the Third district court The judgment of the lower court was confirmed Costs to the respondent Judge Smith delivered the opinion Judges Btirtch and Miner concurring con-curring The facts in the case were that Sipperly Co made an assignment listing list-ing certain individuals as preferred creditors cred-itors towit Mrs Sipperly and Mrs E J Walling wife and aunt of A F Sip pony The court below declared that the assignment was aid and that decision I was affirmed THERE WAS NO NEGLIGENCE F Samuel Bennett plaintiff and respondent respon-dent vs Tne Tintic Iron company defendants I de-fendants and appellants This was an appeal from a judgment in favor of the plaintiff lor 55000 damages for personal L injury sustained by him while in the employ em-ploy of the defendant caused by the negligence of the defendant Judgment reversed on the ground that there was no negligence shown Justice Smith delivered deliv-ered the opinion Zane and Miner concurring con-curring THE INNOCENT THIRD ARTY L John H Voorhees vs JennieA Fisher 1 appellant This was an action to recover 1 1000 and interest on a promissory note t payable to Will R Swan and judgment I was rendered T > y the district court in favor I of the plaintiff for 51215 on the ground that although at the time the note was mado there was a mortgage on the property prop-erty for the purchase money of which the note was made and of which mortgage mort-gage tho defendant was ignorant and she was compelled to redeem the property the holder wasan innocent third party Judgment was affirmed by Judge Bartch Zane and Smith concurring DAMAGES AFFIRMED George Everett vs the Oregon Short Line Utah Northern railway appellants Judge Bartch delivered the opinion The plaintiff in this case claimed damages for personal injuries received while a passenger passen-ger on defendants train at North Salt l ake and the jury found for the plaintiff in thx sum of 4500 The plaintiff was an employee of the company and at the time the accident occurred was travelling in the caboose of the train having paid his fare therefor The accident was caused by a collision The judgment was affirmed Judge Miner concurring KEW TRIAL GRAXTED Geo H Tausey aEd A E De Ricqles appellants vs Geo A Etzel David E Moore John G Wheeter and Joseph Armstrong appeal from Judge Zanes I ruling in the Third District court The action rose upon a verbal contract in regard re-gard to the North Star mine The jury t returned a verdict for the plaintiff in the sum of 52000 The district court granted C defendants a new trial from which order the plaintiffs appealed The order L of the Third district court for a new trial e was confirmed by Judge Miner on the I ground of insufficiency of evidence Bartch and Smith concurring FOR THE LOSS OF A LEG Frank Leak vs the Rio Grande Western I Railway company appellant In this case the plaintiff was a teamster hauling ore Irom the mines at Bingham canyon and loading it on cars provided by the defendant de-fendant at Bingham That by the breaking I break-ing loose of five cars and their running t down an incline his wagon was run into and smashed up and he so injured that it was neceeary to amputate his leg above the knee The plaintiff received a judgment judg-ment in the court below for 3370 Defendant De-fendant made a motion for a new trial which was overruled on condition that 53000 be remitted from the judgment which was done Thereupon the defendant defend-ant appealed from the judgment and from the order denying defendants motion for c new trial Judge Miner affirmed the judgment of the court below Judges Bartch and Smith concurring THE BEAR LAKE CANAL CASES William Garland appellant vs tho Bear Lake and River Waterworks and Irrigation Ir-rigation company and the Jarvis Conk lin Mortgage and Trust company and Corey Brothers Co respondents suit was originally brought to recover for work done as contractor for the canal company and payment was given in favor of Garland for 8955133 the amount due according to the estimates of the com panys engineer and disallowed his Garlands Gar-lands claim for work in excess of the estimates es-timates A decree was also rendered for Garland against the water and irrigation company for f23000 and a decree against Garland for s similar amount in favor of the subcontractors sub-contractors Judge Zane affirmed the decision I de-cision of the court below Judge Bartch concurring INJUNCTION SHOULD HAVE BEEN GHAKTED Martha Ann Coombs appellant vs Salt Lake 8 Fort Douglas Railway company com-pany The Third district court granted a decree for 339950 as damage caused to the plaintiffs property on U street by the construction of said companys track but denied the Injunction prayed for hence the appeal The court held that the court below erred in not granting the injunction and reversed the judgment and remanded tho case Judge Zano delivered de-livered the opinion and Miner and Smiths Smith-s concurred t ATTORNEYS TAKE NOTICE I W S Hendeison vs Charles W Rig RigI gins appellant This was an appeal from a judgment for 24645 from a commissioners j commis-sioners court The appellant had perfected per-fected his appeal to the Third district dis-trict court but had failed to pay the docket fee within the time re I auired by the rules of the court and the case was dismissed In deciding Judge Bartch said This court has repeat lly held that the rules of the district court are binding upon parties to the action It is not sufficient excuse to avoid their effect that attorneys are not familiar with them It is their business to bow them Judgment is affirmed Smith and Miner concurred A FAETNEHSHIB DISPUTE i 0 Charles L Hanneman vsL C Karrick I ct aL appellants from the Third district I 4 court opinion by Associate Justice I Bartch In this case the plaintiff alleged that he and the defendant entered into partnership to carry on a general mercantile mercan-tile business in this city on Feb 3 ISStf and the business was continued until 1888 when the defendant took exclusive possession of the partnership books and stock and excluded plaintiff t from the premises The plaintiff further alleged that he was at all times ready and I willing perform his partofthepsrtner Iu agreement and that the profits of the bufcineee for the two years duration of the partnership was fl5000 Judgment was demanded for fao000 for damages G and that the partnership be dissolved It iJ ppearedtrom th e contract between the ° 0 0 0 5 QC d oJ 0 n < i parties that Hanneman had no < capital of 1 his own but was loaned 5OPO by car I rick I rickThe defendant in his answer denied all the material allegations and demanded II judgment against Hanneman for 57000 which he alleged Hanneman owe3bim The action was tried in the first Instance before S A Merritt as referee I whtvfound for the plaintiff in the sum of 51204053 which was affirmed by the Third district court and the defendant appealed Judge Bartch rendered ndgt ment for 904053 with which modification modifica-tion the ruling of the lower court was confirmed Justice Miner concurring MUST PAY FOE HIS CLOTHES Joseph Baumgarten vs Frank Hoffman Hoff-man appellant appeal from the Third district court The judgment of the lower court for f20 in favor of plaintiff alleged to be due for a suit of clothes was affirmed Justice Miner delivered the opinion and Bartch and Smith concurred COMPENSATION FOE STOCK KILLED Ira D Wines vs Rio Grande Western Railway company appellant from the First district court The judgment in favor of the plaintiff for 83203 for stock killed by defendants trains was affirmed Justice Miner delivered the opinion in the court and the entire bench concurred he case having been decided by Justice Blackburn NOT EARLY ENOUGH American Publishing company appellant ap-pellant vs the C E Mayne company from the Fourth district court Judgment Judg-ment of the lower court sustaining defendants de-fendants objection to a deposition offered by plaintiffs was reversed on the ground that the objection should have been interposed at an earlier date Chief Justice Zane delivered the opinion Bartch and Smith concurred DECISION AFFIRMED W L Coffin vs James T McIntosh appellant from the Fourth district court In this case Justice Bartch affirmed the decision of the lower court in favor of the plaintiff for 810 Zane and Smith concurring con-curring ailnor Matters In the case of Frank Lsnke vs the Rio Grande Western Railway company appellant ap-pellant the bond on writ of error to the supreme court was fixed at 20000 Simon J Lonergan et al appellants vs M B Buford et al clerk ordered to issue remittitur to the district court on a mandate from the Supreme Court of the United States affirming decision of the territorial supreme court William Garland vs the Bear Lake and liver Waterworks and Irrigation company com-pany et al appeal prayed to the United states Supreme Court upon the fixing of a bond In the case of George C Whitmore a writ of habeas corpus was issuedand made returnable at 11 a m today J W Cherry and George W Arm strong were admitted to practice in the supreme > court |
