| Show SUPREME COURT COUnT CALENDAR Chief Clerk Cerk Palmer Gives Out tho the Ono For the tho February Term Terni Clerk lerk of oC tile tho Supreme Court L Ii p V Palmer has haB made up the calendar of oC the court cOUt for tor the time February term which begins Monday Fob Felt l cb S 8 The calendar follows fellows In itt II till full ful Felt Fell S State vs 1 Froth Fred Prel I See Sec Second fec ond olid district i state ss n S D 1 H II I DaUs RI anti Thomas homus Hose Ho First district 11 leorI C t l appellant vs 1 tho time Pleasant Valley Coal CoI company et CC et al ai district ills l C Feb Fob 9 Postal Telegraph Cable company respondent rc VH Ss VI Pad laI laIle He fib le railway company appellant See Seo and ond district Kate 1 lt trl of lt Moroni il oro a I Williams ill In in a t ts vs 1 s J T Monroe ct ot al at appellants Third district Dry reek Creek ft Irrigation company s 1 Draper Irrigation com company compan tI Thu I pan pany respondents eu tul t nc Feb Fel eh IO 1 W V Hicks appellant vs Southern Souther S out he iii tie company puny ent elut elt Second district Jacob 0 Johnson respondent VR s a C A First district August vs I Union Coal Coni onI company ap appellant Third hlll ills Felt Feb U Pt It al nl re respondents reo vs a State Savings I L I IB Lit it B company ap Third din dis district Il Charles respondent vs W Vt H ii little Valo Third district Charles Chari 1 I Pence lence respondent vs VI Call Cul tilL Third forum district MutIng Mining COl linn appellant rob Ichi 11 Kuto Johnson John ol respondent vs it Park lark City I It appellant Third this din Oregon Short Shor Line com comit appellant vs S a P 1 ct ot al uI Third district Hol Sol Block ock Ode lit vs 1 s Samuel L I 1 Schwartz defendant John Johl Mann Intervenor and 1111 appellant hlll district Feb loh 15 William respond respondent cut ent Int vs I 1 k Condon mu appellant a I ho it t Soc Sec Second ond the tho t Cham Champlon plan plon Mining company respondent vs 1 the Clue Eureka Hill 11 1 Mining 1111 company Moy lo ito Ion C Fox fo et t nl mil II appellants Fifth dIn dis district 11 Nettle Nete Net tie I on appellant mm I vs s nen ns Rn IR t tx IX of ut the estate of oC Henry Barnes respondent Third din dinI I r Ii I 18 George respondent vs R 5 Oregon Shout Short holt Line 11 come com company nl luau pany y appellant mu lamut Second district il I nt net A Klenk Jr lr lit vs M Short Sho S Lino 11 railway Il we noun ra Ii First Firm district ulcer Oliver S Stir Sar Sartin tin tl respondent sn s H Short Lin company co 1 11 1 S Seronil cond district net Felt Ire 17 The Corporation nf of IC Ih lie Church of or Jesus t of tiC l Saints Saint et at nl nh 11 rl vs s n listen Ilen Watson ln appellant Third lam Hat Hatry I R ry pl respondent s 1 eon Con ln district company rp Third Feb Feh Ieh 18 City I It vs 1 the tIme Hear Bear Lake River IU r Waterworks ft Third Irrigation loman Pt et nl uI |
