Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1885-05-06
THE COURTS.
SUPREME COURT.

TUESDAY, May 5, 1888.

TUESDAY. May 5, 1885.
Court met at 10 \. NJ Present-Morris ; 7.
j., presiding McKinstry, j.; Mckee D.; morn
ton j.: MyTick, j.; SnaTpsten, D.; hoss, D.; NC
! Carthy. Clerk; Finkler, BalllfI
atssEFyans VS. Ross-On motion of Lesser
ordered that appellant have twenty days TO Tile
/ brief cause thereupon to be submitted.
G543-Noore VS. Clear Lake Water WOrks-On
| motion of Catlin, ordered that appellant be al
lowed ten days to file brief, respondent ten days
to reply, appellant ten days TO reply thereto
cause to be thereupon submitted
g4q-Wilson VS.. Bernard ct al.-PurSuant to
stipulation filed herein cause ordered submitted
upon briefs upon file.
9O29-Smith VS.. Stockton and CopperopoliS
Railroad Company-Ordered continued for the
term.
925l-saunders vs. Harling-Sane order
STRAIGHTFORWARD VS.. the County of FL Dorado
Same order.
S7O5-Forbes VS.. the County of FL Dorado
Same order.
7Ss3-Butcher VS.. Vaca Valley and Clear Lake
Railroad-PurSuant to stipulation filed herein,
ordered that appellant be allowed twenty days
to file brief, respondent twenty days to reply,
cause to be thereupon submitted
9265-Cothrin VS.. Taber CT aL-Pursuant 10
StipulatiOnS filed herein, ordered that respond
ent be allowed thirty days to file brief, appellant
twenty days to reply, cause 10 be thereupon sub
mitted.
gl52-Sharp vs.. Blankenship-On motion of
! Dudley cause crdeIed submitted upon briefs on
! file.
921-Hedges vs.. superior Comt-0rdered that
| respondent be allowed thirty days 10 ME Drlel,
cause to be thereupOn submitted
gO9t-Hulsey VS. Bryan-On motion of Garter,
| and suggestion of the death OF Marshal Ney
/ BRYAN appellant herein. ordered that Mary j.
| Bryan deceased, be and is hereby substituted as
! appellant herein, in place and stead of said de-
cedent. Further ordered that respondent be
allowed thirty days to file brief, appellant twenty
| days TO reply, cause to be thereupon submitted.
| S521-BroWn VS.. MoOre-Ordered stricken from
! the calendar, to be restored upon notice.
| II 0l3-Hall VS.. Superior Court-Ordered that
respondent be allowed twenty days to file brief,
| appellant twenty days to reply, application
| thereon TO be submitted.
| 20,07l-People vs.. French-Argued by Camp
| bell for appellant, Deputy Attorney General for
respondent, and submitted
| 2O,172-PcOple vs.. Hamblin-OTdered cOntin-
ued for the session.
2O,O74-People VS.. Fong All SiDg-Samc order.
20,075-PeOple vs. Johnson-Same order
! 20,076-People ". Moore-Same order.
! 300S7-People vs. LangtOn-Ordered that ap-
pelant have thirty days TO file brief, respondent
! five days to reply, cause TO be thereupon sub
mitted.
! liant be allowed twenty days to file bTiet, re-
| spondent twenty days to reply, cause TO be
! thereupOn submitted
2O.093-PeOple vs. Devon-Ordered that appel
| liant be allowed twenty days to file brief, re-
spondent twenty days TO reply, cause TO be
thereupOn submitted.
94$3-Gardner ct al V. Decentralization of
! Bayue TO dismiss appeal argued and submitted
Motion denied.
Adjourned until 10 A. NJ. tomorrow.
DEPARTMENT ONE.
9l25-Milledge vs.. Hide ct al.-Judgment af
lirmed. McKnstIy, j. We concur: Mckee, j.;
Ross, J.
9S-6-Rhodcs VS.. acknowledgement and order
affirmed. McKinstry, J. We concur: McKee,
j.; Ross, J.
DEPARTMENT TWO.
9514-Campbell VS.. Judd-Motion TO dismiss
appeal argued by Burrows and submitted.
Adjourned.