Arizona weekly citizen., 1882-11-12
Court RepOrt-Judge ". W. Hoover,
 Presiding.

WEDNESDAY, Nov. s.
 Southern Pacific R R. vs. R. Il. Paul,
 e1-officio tax collector of Pima county.
 Counsel for defendant agree to admit
 the affidavit of Charles Crocker now on } file Tn this court, to be used as parole
 testimony subject to all objections ss to
 its revelancy and materiality, but not
 as to the form of tine testimony, and second that the copy of the mortgage appearing of record in the County Re-
 corder's office, shall be admitted in evil
 dence. Plaintiff to have fifteen days to file briefs, and defendant five days more
 to file briefs Tn reply. The case to be
 argued in chambers at any time the
 court may desire.
 Richard Woffendon vs. Pedro Charou-
 leau ct al. Same vs. r. J. Charouleau
 ct al- It IS stipulated in open court
 that the demurrer be considered as sub
 mItted. Ten days given plaintiff to file
 briefs, and ten days further time to de- fendants to file briefs in reply.
 r. R. Fully vs. Leopoldo Carrillo ct al On motion of counsel for plaintiff E. W. Aram, Esq, was appointed guar dian ad litem to represent the following minor heirs: Matilda Carrillo, Leo | poldo CarrillO Junior, Louis Carrillo. Joaquin Carrillo, Jesus Carrillo, Artero or Autero Carrillo, Oscar Carrillo. Leo nel Carrillo and Amanda Carrillo. The case IS dismissed as to John Doe, Jane Doe, Richard Roe and Rachael Roe. | The case Is moved on the calander l Plaintiff introduced the verified con- plaint, summons, proof of service of summons, proof of publication of sum mons, affidavit and order of publication, and certain other documentary evil dence and rested. The defendant Leo poldO CarrIllo, not appearing and the | other defendants appearing by tn, ir said guardian ad litem, E W Aram and offer ing no testimony, said acti, is con tlnued tlll tomorrow morning for sub mission
 P CharouleRu vs. W H Mueller, opin- ions received and filed. Defendants motion for non suit granted.
 Frazer vs. Frazer, divorce. IL is understood that of the $50 deposited with the Clerk for the use of the defendant, after deducting the Clerk and Reporters costs, that the Sheriff | be authorized to withdraw from said | remaining sum, sufficient to tender | each witness subpoena, one days fees | and pay sad Sheriff for his costs in- | cured in subpoening the same
 Whereas, Theo. l.. Stiles, U s. Court | Commissioner for the First Judicial | District of the Territory of Arizona, has | rendered an account of his official ser vices for the First District Court of | Pima county, and has proven on oath to the satisfaction of this Court that the services therein charged have been actually and necessarily performed as therein stated, and whereas said charges appear to be just and accord ing to law. IL Is hereby ordered that said account amounting to the sum of - and the same Is hereby approved.
 F $ Leon vs. B Valenzuela ct al. Jury waived by both parties. Default is en- tered against z z Valenzuela without costs and plaintiff dismissed as against John Doe, Richard Roe and Mary Roe Plaintiff offers the entry of the city of Tucson In the land office the patent of the U. $. to Sidney R De Long, Mayor, deed of lot 10, block 194, from the cor poratlon of the village of Tucson to traclsco Leon, Tn connection herewith, and act of the Legislature empowering the city of Tucson. Defendant admits that sufficient demand for possession of the premises was made by plaintiff on defendant and refused, and that defend ant was Tn possession of said premises 0n the 23d day of November, 1881, and has been, and Is now, adversely in pos session ever since to title of plaintiff. Defendant and plaintiffs then introduced witnesses in their separate behalfs. Case submitted on briefs to be filed n 10 days by plaintiff. Ten days further time for cross briefs, ten days further time to reply.
 Frazer vs. Frazer, a jury being de- manded by defendant a venire was then issued for twenty-four, good and lawful citizens to appear in the Court room Nov. 9th at 10 a. m.
 SATURDAY, Nov. 9.
 Elwana L. Conn vs. Robert Conn; decree for divorce, ordered that said action be prosecuted III fOrma pauperis, and that the officers of this Court per form all necessary service without the fees provided by law.
 ;. Ainsa ct. al. vs. C. D. PostOn, ct al; it IS ordered that the defendant Poston, be permitted to file an amended affidavit on his motion to open default, and that he shall serve a copy of said amen ded affidavit by o'clock, this day, and the matter set for hearing Friday after the disposition of the case of Thompson ct. al. vs. Dake ct. al.
 Robert Frazer vs. Refugia Frazer, action for divorce; it is expressly that the Jury shall consist of nine jurors, and no more. Argument by counsel was waived. The Court instructed the jury and they retired for dsliberatIon. On again coming into Court they returned a verdict in ac- ] cordance with the prayer of the con- plaint whereupon they were discharged and the case reserved for further con sideration.
 r. Charouleau vs. W. Fl. Muller; ap- piicatlon for attorneys fees on the part of attorney for defendant, argued and submitted.
 FRIDAY, Nov. 10.
 Robt. Frazer vs. Refugia Frazer. It IS ordered that judgement be entered III favor of plaintiff and against defend ant, absolutely dissolving the bonds of matrImony heretofore existing between them, and that costs of said action be bald by plaintiff on the ground that de- fendant IS too poor to pay the same.
 NJ l. Caldwell vs James Caldwell Case submitted on the report of the ref rec and judgment ordered in favor of the plaintiff.
 P R Tully ct al vs L Carvillo ct al 2 Final proofs made by plaintiff and case submitted. Judgment ordered entered for plaintiffs III accordance with the prayer of the cOmpliint.
 q H Thompson vs c P Dake ct al Witnesse~ examined and case set for ar gument on the llth.
 An Sing vs. Chan Tin WO, An Foy vs. Chan Tin WO, and Chan Tin WO & Go. vs. An Sing and An Foy. It is ordered that these cases be dismissed in accord ance with the stipulations filed.
 Nabob Pacheco ct alv $ $ Hughes. On motion of counsel for defendant its ordered that this case be dismissed for want Cf prosecution.
 tiay.d Durham vs. Marcus katz. Case submitted, and ten days given de- fendant to file briefs.
 United States vs. David Dunham ct al. On motion Of counsel for defend ants, this case was dismissed for want of prosecution
 Christmas Cantata-