| Show 0 WORK OF THE COURTS Jury Awards 491 Damages in a Condemnation Suit rnation DISPUTED RENT ACCOUNT ORSOX A IVOOMjEY SUES TiE JOHXSOX PRATT DRUG C Suspended Policemen Alleged Unlawful Un-lawful Dismissal anti Sne the City For 572O Litigation Aliotrt a Saloon Tronbles of the Partners District Conrt Orders and General Gen-eral Court News The condemnation suit of the Great Salt Lake Hot Springs Railway Company Com-pany 5 White Sons Company was resumed yesterday morning before Chief Justice Merrltt and occupied the attention of the court until well on in cour unt the afternoon The suit was brought for the condemnation of about an acre and a half of land between Salt Lake and Farminerton to be used for putting in a switch or spur from the plaintiffs railroad Hon J L Rawlins represented repre-sented the plaintiff and Attorneys Le Grand Young and Arthur Brown appeared ap-peared for White Sons The jury after an hours consultation consulta-tion leturned a verdict condemning the land to the use of the plaintiff and awarding the defendant 13875 value of the land S 75 for fencing and 27750 for damage to the portion of the land 49125 not sought to be condemned total I Wool ley vs Johnson Pratt Drug Co I The suit of Orson A Woolley against Charles E Johnson and Parley P II Pratt jr trading a Johnson Pratt Drug company came on before Chief I Justice Merritt a jury being waived The plaintiff alleged that on January 19 1891 he leased certain premises ithe same being a part of the building known as the Constitution building for a term of five years for the monthly rental of 0 a month for the first 12 months and S425 per month thereafter ito Johnson and Pratt On August 4 1892 Johnson and Pratt assigned the lease to the JohnsonPratt Drug company without obtaining the consent con-sent of plaintiff thereto that Johnson and Pratt acting as officers of the corporation I cor-poration paid the rent up to May 31 1893 but since have failed and refused to pay rent and the sum of S1700 is I due for which judgment is prayed against Johnson and Pratt and the JohnsonPratt Drug company Attorney J H Moyle appeared for the plaintiff and Messrs J H Hurd and A E Pratt for the defendants The case was proceeding when court adjourned until this morning |
