Show ys5L5 lIorllt1I IIECIIIIS T Ir RulIY tnuor el rtnod The Buuenio court also banded down u opinion today In Ibo case of Molar vi Iayl r Himney A Arm trong anI the Ball Love Building and Mai ufacturlug company defend ani alllrmluc the judgment ot tbp OlIn bluW oslo both cues at 1lalo i Illlj coat Ihe opinion li I written by Dutrlot Judge Charles U Uart sod it concurred con-curred In by Chief Justice Zane and Justice Miner lhesecaus B being dependent upon lIre same facts were tried together the findIngs of Ibe couit bslui lu laW rho dOIDdaul at plalullU cost The appall 1 was taken on the duulal ota ot-a motlou lore new trial Tbe errors of the trial court In denying motion for new trial Is reviewed having Lee i embodied by counsel fur plalullU lu a bill of exceutloim Ihe case brliflr staled Is as follnwi In 1891 fourteen lumber dealem of Ihs city lotui d an association known aolb Salt Llk LOlUbermell ex change1 with W U Donoell eden letary The exchange purchased the lumber and Block In trade or George Buns A oimpany tbe consideration being Slwf52 liaou dealer was allotted ID touch toe cent if the Block whIch was done by a special committee Toe ajmot94S3 WIB pilu down und the notes ol the dealers given for tbe remainder nccordlna to the percentage percent-age Allotted them JO A Voter gave hto uole for tIre Carry Uomb rJ com 1001 It 1 bonIng horn alouw that cc uruflbg to that ccmpibji charier It was prevented Irom giving or signing my notes All of tie notes were In ourseof time paid with the exception excep-tion of Vlsseli tInge A Com any bad turned over Its notes to Becretary Djunull und I vas ibsiucled 10 keen a strict ao C i not ol what each dealer or nember of the exchange took tool the stock In troll Some of the dealers drew In ezanes of their allotment sxceot Carey Liui thrll Lumber cJmpany MvolIl firms paid Don Doll cash aa payment fur the lumber drawn In exceot ol Ihtjr proportion No dOor Ion was given ulm as to what disposition dispo-sition Biiculd be made ot the mooey Ike uobaull bllog au count 01 the Utah National blIt Dannsll pliced It to itiu credit of the exohai accountable gating e me 3C7 rlloxcuon boo cme Ibiteblid tyTsylir Horn ry A ArnnlrooglnexcessoU7aaudtbeHa I Like Building and Mauiifaoturint inmpany I excess uf s3J 60 whlcu was paid by Donu II lo Ihu ft m natnei In these iutu wan in iludr1 nmnunl < oluet nt m lUn TOe role In the meantlma had b en by Igllmol tbo proprly 01 Hider who ued lhememberBjlully for theIr payment 1 lue court below held that the leclsbleJno was MIVOM and not joi t aid tact n ne al the ccilera were liable ItiBsgsa I do Co far anytbliiK fuitlirr llian hoe mtunt of Ihe coles gen by ooeit doler TUB to tianscrli en wsaorot conflict 01 toUmoDY tnt lIre court finds that thc oDeluolI 01 law a correct |