| Show II I I OPINION RELATES TO TRAIN ORDERS Case Involving Damages Award od cd Administrator of Victims Estates Is Reversed CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE Crow nt Have Mh I tJ lips t the lie lit or Train In A battled banded flown down br th court a bp J sad in III by J JesUs Judge Hoell ot of the district t I is ft reversed c cIn In the of A I 1 II tOIl towa ton tor the tAM Union Pacific lacUe In Ut lb trial court was e I Iw awarded w plaintiff of 1110 and 2 I Ia a SI Lot lor the Uta death of r and 1 tV 34 I wit went killed in a t r k tie Wyc 0 Nov IJ 11 I alleged that tin Ih W was due to tn Ute the seeding 1 of f R a wrong order by the dispatcher t to which leta rued read that Nn n 3 was luSt ning one hour ow and lit 10 IA r when I is should have reed ad je bout auld and SO minutes is III the sub substance stance ot of Judge Julge Pricks rl opinion Chief Justice dissenting That the respondent has hA not nul tab listed by evidence that the appellant warn In not adopt adOpting ing a different rut rule or method In train orders or la In pursuing the tho method It had adopted end and using ii that tM the d deceased and attn hi Iraln I r row were guilty lIt of 01 nI ng In not protecting either theli train or themselves when th Ih time lime of th the traIn Ipa tr gr trail and that Ih the rIt d for himself blIt null make tM the run em bt On Grange ni within the a time h he had t ti ii I sq 0 and hour all as the evidence ii o stands he assumed tIMId all rIsk of dung incident to 10 the run between tid nd end 4 that itt viI view of tho th undisputed al evidence It is III a I 1 Im m moe conjecture whether Ihl tl In No lit 50 ws thu h cau Cause of tIn th Th The court therefore erred elred In refusing I f direct a verdict In favor faor of 01 the ap appellant all am requested b by It at the dow 1011 ot of the Ihl for the Ion roana that In view ot of the ludl undisputed no WU Wa DOt act entitled tn t pr praM as aM a matter ot of law U A jury jur In III JUdge Armstrongs divisIon lon ot or tint district court has ratum returned d a I verdict In the essa of the Protective tIon a against aln t 1 W II anti and J 7 21 II finding fo for plaintiff In the sues of I and vt n to 21 2100 LIQUOR I Null Bull for divorce w was Wd flied MUot afternoon b by Matilda Tulip Taylor Jalo directed against Francis S 8 Taylor Talo Tile The defendant nt Sot iii ot of being a drunkard and ot of mOat of his hla earnings earning for tor drink tl I his bla wit wife ot of the necessaries ot of life The d Oct 4 1 1907 NF IW A Jury In Jud Judge e division ot of the district court COUll reported late ale eater da day afternoon that the they ha had ben been unable to agree altree upon a verdict In the theof ot of Albert th the Denhalter Bottling company by his 1118 guardian at litem Oril Hud liOn eon ud to for IWI as damages ton th tile loes of an lye eye while manipulating I Ian I an III una n end bottling machIne Thi Th disagreement ot of the Jut July wilL wll tate late a new trial ot of the case SIt ily Dy request lit of counsel the ease r rA A 1 Cranney eL l III ci Yore John A h has been set et for Feb 16 The Millie cause w was on the calender for hearIng Feb 1 11 t c case nt If th the state against M I 1 Hutton was for the term it wa of a hh a women of minor n lill age at flint flintham ham sUIts OS ON II 11 II 5 filed suit in III th the district today against and aad Selma Anderson a so of the estate of 10 Eel JW e II Oscar ecar Wen to recover 1 and Interest sHaded to be d due on a real contract SUI FOR it dama damage cent was filed Willi by JIe LArto y In the district directed against the Salt hit Lake Coper company Plaintiff avers that he ha wee serIously and ami lu in Ju while dle In it the empLoy ot of the deett dent t In Its Ita Copper Mountain ml ma at t Tacoma Tacola Xv 1 Dec 25 C 1107 through neglect on his Uta part of t pall t TOW TOWI I in It an cede signed ed b by J Judge Id Morse lur lure yesterday e rda W I Is restraIned throwing hi bl alies Ue belongings nM out if t their b boss at t ILS Hickory trI tret la Is directed not DOt to draw rw his Jala wass from the D Denver taver itt HI Gran Rally Rail ay auth u th hearing beanne ot of hi his air It tor shall hall have halo been and ancS he be Is III cited to fa up ap pr I 10 to u show ebow wh why it should hould not pay IY temporary alimony Rubric I Is 11 iii 0 who ho wa M It day ay n two to of 1 hiten n Ii I anniet allun sal anti fur for die II lie I IJ m ilm lii III the Ia UP t curt acre 1 It the case of the tat of 01 Chat ht H Han e C Anderson n Ih the laU latter being the h The be d di who I is a t of Man Mant I county is 0 wiLh pet er JUry The grew out of aid 1 d di nial to ba lotte beet wide by while I iW lii III a b his U lt I Ihor tot diver hor Mrs Mr Anderson and sonIc ot of oter her er eeoc that the Ole sad d 1 h had them In threats alil eru ru I lie He warn daal charged a tilt It 1111 beaten bill 11 dill dran rJ eli 1 t I have hev threatened 10 0 nH S II pit I through of the tens W cent RI th the Ii h husband had a rope Fops froth III a besOt 1 In Its lb cellar atol t I told hew her th thet he 1111 to 10 hl her I wore or that all 11 llaMa all allo 5 tal else ait t he be averred verr thai thu thuI hi he had no nuts nil spoken fr cross a 0 to I not nor th In InQ ot otway Q way t for followed It hi e in III tit the district I 1 sa the I cent ass a d |
