Show COURT COURTW W II G HARD Opinions lI I Down This on Cases of Interest CONTEMPT CASE flEW HE TRIAL That COlli t lIal iia o I tion t 0 r rI Oil fl a aLe Le al Tho Th court dowil nil RH tho judg m nt o of tim the court fl th ruse CUNO ot ota a 0 W v tOp YR Ss IhA Dalu 1011 Th IM a Iii roo Joode lo county c cM ra M Y 31 11 1000 for tim Iho ot at 1 a ato to taI All order n II tC 10 WM itt In tho In thIs city on oil Io 10 1000 tin Clay the tho wn hUt It II vi agreed h th Ihl Judge the tor or that nil hould no not I ho effectIve until tim Iho san 1118 flied When the tho case tried the fet et aside the o of the tho rr r cohe tOI fj the earon It vim IldoN ti hlll beon before any RnY action Sn lIIS commenced H lall ICICCO o heM ell that no for Cor a receiver lit Cit Iho ha limo the J wn YaM It was 1118 ordered that Ihn In of the tho ro 10 cler ho tO 10 tim the Rn nn ot of the Vroni nn an rin by Wt tilT or of the thIch Willi written 11 by McCarty concurred In b by hief kin anti holds that tho Ihn net that thU tho receIver tho clay the action COlli rel Iho IL II nullity rani thoro WItH nn flIt oral tile the judge counsel that tha t tim tho IIO hut effect untIl lifter tile tho not I ell Ie tho In Ihu eyes eys ot of the tho Th Judgment or of the lower court I therefore ut Of lip taxed against eMm CASl eMmA 4 A 4 court has haM no flO to 10 try ur or the trIal ot of It 11 nII un on II a legal Such uh IA i th the decision lit the court today In III Inthe the tha cuso ut If MIX Max lcd Ward A In which the judgment ot nf he loner III 18 tO 10 with tu to It II new lIew trial Ulal Willi In Weber county hy to r tI Itt In upon n it trademark fOI or certain tilt the of the lUPO euce 1 fl Ik n defendant Un tiff that had th outer Wore Were tu to hint him tor or con CIll ot of rite ot of Ih Ito cue caJa IJ by tim Iho court coull on Monday Fob Foh 23 1903 The Ilay Feu Feb 22 2 being u a I legal gol holIday failing Culling on tM the suit provide tile day bo be observed liS as n ft logal holiday JI Benco the tho on the tho WAn Willi n a legal I rIte CASO un OIl Tuesday Fob Id 24 nod was ordered In 10 plaintiff tor or Inch colt COli Iti In the Bum ot o costs II II II I to Ii or thin state also I hit t I n ness inn y bit transacted On U LI I al hol holIday III I bitt th ha premo court in III It its opinion tolla today holds that contempt proceedings do lInt come tInder hence It is III that the he In III this case he and a I now trial granted tie do tier r Th opinion lit of the laM written by Bartch and 1111 concur In Iii by JustIce Justice McCarty LOWEn AFIm El Elthe the award lit of lit the arbitrators n by tho ho Parties tO lie Iho to settle 1111 dIfferences between 1111 lii III the caSe of Joseph l 1 l tile thc Creel 1 lIlt LIve lock S Y V ln li r rJoseph r Joseph I E raylor DOli I Titus ii it Is tt III I ii over PItt lieu lat III nn nil of at the supreme today tolla In Ito Iho lit of tilt ho lowel ColiC t I iS 11 III ii nil t costs agaInst All actIon was lall brought h by lbs Iha lit III the district court for tor in 10 recover In the tho stint lit IC rot Cor Cl 11 lit lf lease Itt III with 1 il It Was set let this Ihl lessor i nil rt Itt II t II is ion d do to le lI herein of tin sited which Ivero 10 a nil d NI ii hat I itt hl deceitfully put ut 1110 tile 1151 II ii a lit ut and ot of RH ItH Flip ahOI amount lit If 1111 II h 1110 for alleged or 1111 rho whole r up Ott to 10 bun C 1 C H 11 mi arbitrators 1 It Il was I hit t t Ill be binding All itil of tite IIII evi dettro the tho arbitrators found tue Iho issues Ill III of SOI ln coil All hi lila lit at The Th failed II NI tn lii wIth tim award Ihl suit HUll was Ill ed iCy hy t ti the tite company and it fIte 1011 reliCt lint this Ihl IhlI I of If tits tho arbitrators CO coy nil iiIi this in AI anti I h a ft rd Still I lit III ot of itin Vat I Cf Il From thai bat i itoh titis l This lh opinion of tit tue supreme COUrt ilowit lb Ih 1185 h ii h nail In by J Justice Mc If WI lm IfF or of tile the district OUI t has 1 a itt III Ih the estate case lit III h its th In ill the Ihl will tIt It n It providing lila hili he ii kept nut d ds anIon the tel tOI ao a ii hl tIbi is puh polk v nod hulce is III old nd of no effect fIOt Tho Iho 11 rIP of cit th ito cohn ii Ihl iii eXl to make A r report port tor tory to tn II a distribution of at the I heir it If illIcit is II lit ut titis time rho Which l wits Willi to 10 the to III the r lit III lb will was WaR Q ft 1110 nod nud or Of this anil executors ore as 1111 both bolh arid ants w whim lle of nt tite heirs Oil olle sIde or the other lither ot of tite Tiis In the tas are It H I B Walker S WAlker nil as ad or of tile the estate ot of It 1 Walker Alhert Winifred J alker II h H A WAlker tim Iho guardian ot of lie I I i Chlrles it tIit tI Wallter tutu eorge It II Walker nil as ox tIC itt Ihl Hilt hist will ot of It nod titu thu lire are Mary A t It and Mory A CheeK Joseph n fl Walker Oil ot of the Ihl lust will and 1 ot of Joseph It 11 Walker |