OCR Text |
Show DIVORCE IS GRANTED IN JUDGE KARRIS' COURT Judge N J. Harris this morning rendered decisions in the following cases which he has had under advisement ad-visement for some time: Margaret Moves Richardson vs. Leslie Les-lie B. Richardson. Tbe court finds the issues in favor of the plaintiff and against the defendant; plaintiff Is entitled to a decree of divorce, together to-gether with $10 per month alimony. F. M. Thomas vs. Ogden Rapid Transit company. Defendant s motion for a new trial denied Effie M. Campbell vs. James F Crosby, et al. Tho court finds the issues in favor of the defendant and agaLnst the plaintiff. Frank W. Russell, etc. vs. Richard C. Watklns. Plaintiff's demurrer to defendant's answer overruled; plaintiff plaint-iff granted ten days within which to , freply Plaintiff's motion to strike paragraphs 7, 8, 9 and 10 from de fondant's answer denied as to each of said paragraphs. Annie Cragun, administratrix, etc. vs. Union Pacific Railroad company Plaintiff's demurrer to paragraph 6 of defendant's answer sustained, plaintiffs demurrer to paragraph 7 of defendant's answer overruled. Plaintiff Plaint-iff granted ten days within which to reply. Ravarino & Freschi Grocery company com-pany vs. M. Lombard!, et al. Plaintiff's Plaint-iff's demurrer to amended counterclaim counter-claim of defendant M Lombaxdi sustained; sus-tained; said defendant granted ten day6 within which to further amend counter-claim Weber couuty vs. Julius A. Jacob-sen, Jacob-sen, et al. Defendant's demurrer to plaintiff's complaint overruled, defendant de-fendant granted ten das within which to answer; defendant's motion for change of venue denied. Pearl Davis vs. Harry B, Davis. De fendant's demurrer to plaintiff's complaint com-plaint overruled; defendant granted ten days within which to answer. AD |