Show I. I RULES PETITION f 4 IS IMPERTINENT I Court Takes Exceptions Exceptions S to Application for a Rehearing STRICKEN FROM RECORD I f Court l Rule Hille of or Contract Vit I Individuals hula I Tho Supreme court yesterday oJ ordered r the tho petition for Cor or a rehearing cheating In Inthe Inthe the case of or Brigham City respondent ln aff against t G Georgo II Chase te appellant stricken from Crom the tho court record on the ground that It wn was vas l impertinent The Tho 7 court t ruled that the petition was hn- hn r pertinent antI and that Hint the thu brief In sup aup- of the petition contained o objectionable Jec- Jec matter mallea The two paragraphs to which the court tool took exception were n OB as follows Wo venture to tea say thai halt If this thiN contract was is-as between individuals the distinction would be at itt recognized by hy every ery member of or the court and we wo further venture lo tO say in thai lint over every OV member of or the court would ad- ad vIto lila his client that the tho case of oC the state stale ex cx ret rel Tremble vs Superior court COUlt 11 n Washington lon 4 41 I IS discourses ses J an entirely different ent kind of ot con con- tract meL Nobody could hirIng bring the decision of an court Into greater disrepute to lo lothe the ii l proC profession slon and fluid before the hue people than nn an unwarranted statement of facts act r |