OCR Text |
Show BEFORE JUDGE BLACKBURN. $2,500 Awarded Plaintiff in the Whitehead vs. Smoot Case. In the case of Wm. T. Ercanback vs. John Frith, the jury returned a verdict for plaintiff for $247.50. An order for decree was issued in the case of James Cook vs. Robert Iloden et al. In the case of the Provo Co-op. Institution In-stitution vs. St. V. Le Sieur, a suit brought to recover 3412.31, balance due the plaintiff, a verdict awarding the plaintiff $229.02 was returned. The case of Anna Marks vs. U. P. R'y Co., a suit in which plaintiff claims that she ordered four cases of shoes from W. B. Morse & Co. .Omaha, Neb., and that only three cases were received by her. the defendant receiving re-ceiving four cases at Omaha, was tried, and a verdict for defendant returned. The case of Hymni Barton vs. Mickhael lli'llareu was dismissed without prejudice. The c;is" of Epiiraim Nash vs. Sco-SeM Sco-SeM Br-s. was dismisd. T.ie :;i-e of Leo S Whitehead vs. A. O s. n.:s .cubed and a jury im-p im-p .n A. -hs. L. Rawiinys appeared -ror plaintiff and King & Houtz and Geo. Sutherland for defendant. The plaintiff claims that in 1SS5 he pur chased lots 7 and 8, block 36, plat B, Provo city survey, from Lleazer Jones. In 1887 he left the territory, expecting to be away a short time. Before going he entrusted the deeds for said lots, which had not been recorded, with the said defendant, as a guarantee that he, the plaintiff, would pay to the defendant de-fendant the sum cf $525, which he had borrowed from him to purchase said lots with. He returned in December, 1SS7, and learned that the defendant had in April, 1887, secured a second deed from Jon en for the property. prop-erty. In June, 1SS8. the defendant sold the lots to John Devy. The plaintiff therefore asks for tlO.OOO, the present estimated value of the property, prop-erty, and improvements made by the plaintiff thereon, and costs of suit. The defendant on the other hand admits having secured a deed to the property from Jones, but denies getting a deed as a guarantee. The testimony was continued throughout all day Saturday. MONDAY. In the case of T. II. McEranlach vs. J. D. Brannan, leave to file affidavit was granted. In the case of Caroline T. Bromley vs. Rio Grande Western Railway Co., twenty days additional time was given in which to file statement. In the case of Chas. Hyde vs. Washburn Wash-burn Chipman, an order for judgment for plaintiff, as agreed upon, was issued. is-sued. The arguments in the case of Leo S. Whitehead vs.-A. O. Smoot, were then resumed and the case submitted to the jury, who returned a verdict of $2,500 for plaintiff. The attorneys for defendant de-fendant were granted thirty days' stay of execution In the case of Jungk & Fabian vs.D. C. Reed et al.. a motion Jor continuance continu-ance of the case w;ts denied. A jury was theieupon impaneled. Judge Marshall appeared for plain tiff and Arthur isrovvn for defendant. This suit is brought to obtain damages to the amount of $5,000 for breach of contract In a sheep tram-action tram-action between plaintiff and defendant. defend-ant. Don C. Johnson was admitted to tbe bar of the First District Court. TUKSDAY. The case of Jungk & Fabian vs. D. C. Reed et al.. occupied the whole of the day and was submitted to the jury about 5 o'clock. 3 Alex. Adamson, a native of England, Eng-land, and a resident of Utah county, was admitted to citizenship. "WEDNESDAY. Iu the case of A. L. Luthum vs. J. D. Brennan, leave to amend eomplaint was granted. The ease of Charles Poynter ys. Jamee Chipman et al. was called, and a jury impaneled. Mr. Critchelow appeared for plaintiff, and Geo. Sutherland Suth-erland and Judge Judd for defendant. This is a disputed land case. It appears ap-pears from evidence adduced that Poynter settled on the land in question ques-tion in the year 1S60, and at that time his boundary line ran along the edge of the water of Utah lake, near American Fork; but since that time the watar has receded, lerivin? a 'strip of land five rods wide, on which defendants de-fendants hava slaiied a bathing resort. re-sort. ,The plaintiff claims the land to the water's edge, no matter how far it recedes. |