| Show I Ill Ri4t4 IV I SHEET CASE AFFIRMED D I < = I I I ij j I I Supreme Court Decision In the Cm of A A i h E J I Taylor vs A M RobertsonI I 111 j 1 I tl J ii i Xei l DUTIES OF ASSESSORS ARE DEFINED 1111 L a I ifl I 1 What Abstract if Col Appealed f1111 I I J I + I 1I I ConIA liflitilonialt Entngl t 4 I i if 14 PUhrr Cur 31ttolm AI I I 1 ol I I I 1 7 The Supreme court handed dow nn 4 opinion today In the case of A A Tn > r f I I IJ lor plaintiff I and l respondent vs A M I I II I I Ilobcrtson I defendant nnd appellant > > nlh I i a t affirming Iho judgment cof the lower 1 R f court I i Robertson am neor for Grand Ii li 11 count In March 1S97 assessed n Inrge I 1 4 1 and of s ipep belonging to Taylor I Ilia I 1 On i jJ I I U tit Alleged to be due an taxes far 18S7 being S712i Taylor refused to J I 1 11 W t jay when the assessor levied upon 15 2 Ii I t I I I hrnd of sheep selling the name to John I I J Wllcox for tin 12 Taylor then brought 1 g I fVHt against Robertson to lecovor tile I 4 I of i i cum of tK6 damages alleging that he I et 4 I wan unlawfully dlipovsesscd of i 1f 1 i tile sharp The came was I I M11 I it I 1 I tried before Judge Jacob e jt Johnson of the Seventh judicial district I Ir 1 I tI dis-trict last August who rendered a decision I I 0 de-cision In favor of lira plaintiff Taylor q rf 1 0 find holding thai Itobertson had 1 no au I J nI rR I f Iboilty I for assessing the sheep on the ISth of 1ebruarjv UJ7 or at any lime I t t t 1 Y prior to the first Monday In March if i 1SJ7 i I 1 1SJ7The plaintiffs contention was thai i I It i the sheep uiie not assensable In rt I k J a Grand county that he lived In Utah tH I 1 i et county nnd Iliad paid taxes on the sheep If I i I C II the previous Year Accitincate of as I 14 G I I so ttosmnent showed thai they had been l e I nssessed In Utah county for U97 The I I defendant however claimed he found i I A 1 the I sheep I In I Grand county In July 11 1 807 and that for the purpilso or Avoid 1 f Ing the Payment Of the taxes Taylor I I i I I 4 I caused the shorts I to be moved nut of 1 Grand county i I 1 I 11 Justice Miner who delh1 the 1 t oplnllon today finds tho abstract Ie 1 1V I 1lIv allOl does not contain material I I I and Important testimony given upon Ji I the trial and further adds that many t I i of the facts had to bo gleaned from recitals I I citals and testimony contained In a I I lil I I poorly executed typewritten I tmntrlpt k it At mistaken of this nature have arisen I I I In many other cases the court taken = trI tr 1 het I 1 Jill occasion to PoInt out that much crmrs I I may be nvohled In the future InThe 44 preparation of abstracts 11 I t I The abstract savs tho court I P 4 I should contain such purls of the record J vo t rec-ord and testimony under tho rulis ns I o will I fairly j I present the casir for review I I in this court Anything less renders It 1 J more trouhlrom Awl injurious than i If no abstract were filed h Tho court finds that section 10 Fad III Hof chAp er 129 of thc Session Lawn t 1 of 1896 are lii conflict and for both to Is 4 remain 10 form would create confusion A and uncertainty InnsieFsment As well I lit as In the rights of persons resulting I q threfrom I I A 0 I thOn the question as to whether or not I I the assessor had jurliullctloln under tho I I statute to assess properly on the 18th of February and collect tho tax by a I 14 NJ Bale I of ISO head of sheep the court V I mayal 54 i If the assessor had Jurisdiction unit I I an i Bh l Irn I 0 I exercised I his honest Judgment In oncoming I on-coming and collecting tho tax It l he 11 i I acted In the performance of nn official I 4 duty and confined him molt within the il limits of tho statute It his motives A were honest ho should lot 1 > 0 Sold i A civilly HiMe although ho I may have I V 11 creed In tits Judgment Discretion when vested In I an officer however Jeep not I I nnn Lhsolnte or arbitrary poi wo Th 4t 4 discretion nut lie creel In n 11 mamonable mnnner And lot mullcloll ly wantonly and arbitrarily to too 4 wrong and Injury of another 1 This 10 I held to bo the rulo applicable appli-cable to public officers who ore bound I ii I to exercls their deliberate Judgment to I 11 I In the discharge I rOfd their official duties I I and Is I applicable to nil Inferior mngU i trates and others railed to the per formanco of functions In I F y their untllre and character I f4 hill Judicial while Acting within x 6 Ihe julsdlcllon and the legal scoria of I I Ihelr powers ns fixed by law I The court further finds that this evl t lent object of tho several ptovlsliw R i of section S3 page 435 of Iho Revenue 1 Iw I 8 to rndr ussmment oft of-t bor entlle herp etc uniform and tho cnI lIellon of the tax certain I na nt the memo limo allow the enun I j ly where the stock was Intna or t IIImm1 Its pn > > rllon of the tx t t r 0mrsoM upon the wnor In tho county I kbere lie relde I I Tile ourl fields that tile riesepment 1 I i I 4 nd Bile were Illegal nnd Hint Iloberl I t 11 01 tied no jurlsdlcllon under the I 117 ilatut to to rimon Awl moll the hp un d It I ier hh nwessinent of rbruary 18 H9T I I 41 Innnot he uhIII h J 1 The net of going Into a nock of 3r00 < Ihp n1 selecting 152 IIend and telling f 31 I 4 I that Indlc1mlnntI nl 75 rent n A I head Is I held to liale limn Improper and J AB the question of the legality or 11il 11 I I xmstltutlonallly of the statute had not il fteen raised by either party tho court kill 1i SOIM not parts upon It I I I There being no enor found In the I P 61 Indians decree or Judgment tho court 14 IlIrm the judgment opyx I cot frolll Chief Justice Zane anti Justice nartch J lell I il concur A It A Altrinonihil otnlmot o I A somewhat peculiar cape is I being I tried 1 before Judge lilies today t where f t IT o n laggte Hoogland sues her husband j I I Frank Hongland for separate main enance under the laws of IMiJ This J t omplalnt alleges that the parties were ntermatrled at Sinews Vista Colo on i h c lot of July 1SS1 and that during 41 he sear 1B3 hr husbind wilfully leI le-I 41 lerted her and Mr more than five i o rears afterwards failed l to contribute il 4 in thine towards her support It Is I Ire set nut that the ilefendanl had Its t property worth about isniwt which f lonelaled of n second hand store at 17C I I vest Second South street together With vat cslnle In Salt Lake City and In the it I fiats of Ohio Mrs 1 Hoaglund prnja or alimony In the sum of S100 per nonth nand the custody of a thirteen rear old 1 daughter and that the court l want her the sum of S23000 out of de 11 endantH Defendant property In I his answer denies that > o abandoned his wife without sum I tent cause or that ho IIn worth any I mm over S3 COO Other allegations ho Ire denies and further answering al bges that his wife deserted him agnlnst A tin protest and absolutely refused to turnnnd live IIth lien I 1 Defendant also alleges that on the I I tit of March 18G at San Juan Cal is Obtained n decree of divorce levin I Is mfife that since the desertion at Vilmd byllrs lloagland Platoon year I lad elapsed pulling Ihe defendant lot lo-t great disadvantage by the loss of I 11 evidence and the death ot witnesses J hlch would nimlst him In proving his i tide of the case Defendant also nets I p that len Years after obtaining the Iccr of hree nt San Juan lit I natTled Again and Is I lOW the lawful I Ulband 01 another woman A rOI toy i t the decree dated Morh Sth 186 In I t ittaehed to the answer tending to how that lloagland wn released 1 from Its I nt marriage on an order made 14 ly Judge Oir In MarchlSSC At todays hearing Mrs lloagland Is I presented by Sheperd l Dad l Sanford nil the defendant by Iiofbourow and W Uvjfltourow The first wltneM calle1 n Mrs I it I toasland AIr stating the facts W I t 1 I i I IF i I I ubstantlally e nt In hr compalnt the witness said that In 1844 h went to Durango Colo und slnrled a stilt for Mialnttinte fter the cult win ned ohe met lloagland on the street and titter tit-ter talking the matter mer with him they decided I htr I to = rh mlilch thy did for about a 7 wek Then Ma lonlond Pays she learned of his divorce all upo his iefushur to have thai sol aside rho left him For Borne reason o other lie suit filed nt Durango Duran-go was dismissed und another suit of n similar nature Marled at Lendvllle This one was also dlsmmod In IMS on account so the witness Paid of her attorney being In collusion with Hong Ii land Then Mrs Hongland commenced proceedings once more nt Leadvllle this time for divorce and alimony but n lloiglnm was residing out of the state she said her attorneys advised her she could do 1 nothing I A Mrs Campbell was called to the rrIArAt mtni nna orrhrnt eol Afro lonlnd as to film fact of the marriage And de section pre limo The came had not concluded at tt of Joors The venire for twenty petit Jurors fretted frm Judge Chrn court on tho 15th of January was returned today to-day Hdsotn 11milct William Munon WAIter h Conrad Thomas 1Irlmly William r Fowler Harry douMarcl nenJnmln M Harman Joseph 1 WI Items John n lInl < pr and Wllilam T Cromnr wuo wOn voir dire and ne copied W A Carter II J flnnn W I J Wood l and I Jf Jones were ported I Cant too found In city or nllnty M A Peek was reported nB Dead Jacob MorlU and C 1 Mason were aliment ulion thor names were called Jmo A Yntes was excused for the term while John W Circle and l rell Hit were sworn and afterwards ex CUP cd The following additional In nme were trowel from the jury box by Clerk Dunbnr of pror Tho v 1 hp required re-quired to serve an petit juror during tile Iphrunrv term 31111triii i A Mtisser C A Larson ITW ll vM Lawrence ll1n r e WilliamS William-S Owen F J Fabian David McKen ate Arthur Gibby Winter M 1 Joe William Court riilllnci Judge Cherry has bn onggJ for the greater Part of today hnrlnor then the-n me of AS 1 G Stanley and Alexander flnlro i nis trto araint the NI tionAl Flank of the llepubllc n Bull relight Ili recover > m nMge1 1 to lip duo nB money deposited with the ae fndnnt hank toy I I W E tirimth no tninte t nt he Iome Debentures In MAY I 192 1lolnllt Alleging that then the-n he outCemmore i > t urllllths In the It It 415 1 isa it is ki N 4 I I I 7 c K I Ill I I 77 I 1 1 I I q li A i I 11 I I lz nnf T I ol 1 I I I am going after a caT of SALTAIR BAKING POWDER 6 i my Mamma she said It was only 25o a pound and that the Ion I picture of Saltalr I Beach was on every can |
