Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1886-11-11
SUPREME COURT.

! SAcRA MENTo, Tuesday, November 9, 1856.
Court met at 10 A. N. Present, Morrison
,, Chief Justice, presiding Mckinstry, Justice !;
Mckee, Justice; Thornton, Justice; Myrick.
i Justice; Sharpstein, Justice; Spencer, Clerk I;
Finkler, Ballff.
2O20S-People VS.. Layelle-On motion of Dep
uty Attorney General, ordered cause be submit
ted on briefs on file.
20i9O-People VS.. McCoy-same order.
2O229- People VS.. northumberland con-
tinued to the January calendar.
20232-People VS.. Johnson-0n motion of Dep
uty Attorney General, ordered respondent be
allowed 10 days to file briefs, appellant days
to answer, cause thereupon to be submitted
o0234-People vs.. Recon motion of Deputy
Acknowledgement for respondents, and being no
appearance or points and authorities on file, it
is ordered that the judgment and order herein
be, and the same is hereby, affirmed.
9029-Smyth VS.. Stockton and Central Pacific
Railroad Company-Continued.
97i0-Montgomery VS.. Locke-Argued by FL
lott, for appellant. Ordered respondent be al
lowed 20 days to file brief cause thereupon to
be submitted.
People vs. Frink-Motion to dismiss appeal
argued by Deputy Attorney General for respond
ent, Wright for appellant, and surmitted.
Cross vs. Brisco-0n motion of Deputy Attor-
ney General and stipulation on file. it is ordered
that the appeal herein be- and the same is here
by. dismissed.
of Hart, ordered cause TO be advanced and
placed upon calendar. Further ordered that
appellant be allowed 90 days to file brief, re
sp0ndent 10 days 10 reply thereto, cause 10 be
thereon submitted.
Hedges VS.. Dam ct al.-Same order.
Town of Dixon VS.. Mays-On motion of Hart,
caused ordered placed at the foot of present cal
endar.
Comstock vs. Yolo county-On motion of Hart,
ordered cause be advanced and placed upon
calendar. Further ordered appellant be al
lowed 10 days to file brief respondent 10 days TO
reply, cause to be thereupon submitted
1l2S2-Roche vs. Ware Pursuant to stipula-
ton filed herein. cause ordered submitted upon
briefs on file.
Barclay vs. Copeland-Motion by Johnson to
advance cause and place upon calendar submit
ted. Motion denied.
11073-Hagard VS.. California Insurance Com
pany-Argued by McGraw for appellant, and
Faris ct al. vs. Lampson ct al-Upon reading
affidavit, it is ordered appellant herein have 20
days further time from October 2sth in which to
file transcript.
115i6-Babcock vs. Welch-Argued by Rear
don for appellant. and submitted.
unconditional Bank of D. o. Mills VS.. Porter
Bros..-Argued by Hart for appellant, and sub
mitted.
1ll69-Green ct al. VS. State of California-Or-
dered continued until tomorrow and be heard
with cause 1928, Todhunter VS.. State of Calitor
mia.
11057-Lamb VS.. Reclamation District No. los
Argued by Hart for appellant, and further ar
gument continued until 10 A. H. tomorrow.
Adjourned until 10 A. NJ. tomorrow.
WEDNESDAY. November 10, 1856.
Morrison, Chief Justice, presiding McKinstry,
Justice Thornton, Justice Sharpstein, Justice
Myrick, Justice; Mckee, Justice; Spencer, Clerk;
Finkler, Baliif.
11057-Lamb VS. Reclamation District No. 10S-
Argument resumed by Adams for respondent,
Hart for appellant, and submitted
Trefrey vs. Smith-Motion to dismiss appeal
argued by Jones for respondent, Carey for ap-
pellant, and submitted.
On motion of c. 7. Jones, Esq, and presenta-
ton of license from the Supreme Court of the
Territory of Washington, and evidence of good
moral character, it is ordered that Benjamin H
Reynolds be, and he is hereby, admitted to prac
tice as an attorney and counselor lin all the
Courts of this State
1l2SS-Miller VS.. Dunn-On motion of Hart
ordered respondent be allowed 50 days to file
brief, appellant 10 days to reply, cause to be
thereupon submitted.
1l223-HaTris VS.. HARRISON motion of John
son for respondent, cause ordered submitted
upon briefs on file.
114l2-Hausmeister VS.. Porter-On motion OF
Rosenbaum for appellant, cause ordered sub
mitted upon briefs on file.
l15A-Chandler VS.. Peoples Savings Bank
On motion of McKenna, cause ordered submit
ted upon briefs ON file.
1ll9l-Doland VS.. Mooney ct al-Argued by
Alexander for appellant, White for respondent,
and submitted.
ll169-Green ct al. VS.. State of California and
112S3, Todhunter vs. STATE of California-Argued
by Hart, Freeman and Hurd, for appellants
Further argument continued until 10 A. NJ. to-
morrow.
Adjourned until 10 A. NJ. tomorrow.