Los Angeles daily herald., 1888-04-06
THE SUPREME COURT.
Yesterdays Business ss-Calendar
for To-day.

Yesterdays Business Calendar
for To-day.
The following business was trans-
acted in the Supreme Court yesterday :
Luther E. Tubbs admitted to prac-
tice on motion Of P. Reddy and pre-
sentation OF license from the Supreme
Court OF Minnesota.
Frank Monroe Porter admitted to
practice ON motion of Judge. John r.
Bicknell and presentation of license
from the Supreme Court of Wisconsin.
Bull VS.. Coe, administrator, ETC.
Appellant allowed thirty days to file
briefs and respondent thirty days to
answer.
People VS.. Bentley-Ordered that
respondent have leave to file certified
copy OF arraignment and plea.
People vs.. Brown-Ordered that
respondent have leave to file certified
copy of arraignment and plea.
People VS.. Fino-Cause continued
to May term at Sacramento.
Broder OF al. vs.. Conklin ct al.--Or-
dered that respondent have leave to
file certified copies of complaint and
amended complaint. Appellant al
lowed thirty days to file brief and re-
spondent allowed twenty days TO reply
thereto.
Laughlin VS.. Thompson-Ordered
that the transcript on appeal be cor
rected.
Butler ct al. vs.. Beezy-Cause or
dered striken from the calendar.
Goldtree ct al. Vs. Thompson-Ar-
gued by Wilcox for respondent,
Graves Tor appellant, and submitted.
Mallagh vs. Mallagh ct al.-Peti-
tion for rehearing filed for appellant.
Respondent allowed thirty days to
answer, cause to be thereon submit
ted.
Mcleod vs. Meade - Respondent
allowed twenty days to file briefs, and
appellant allowed twenty days to re-
ply; cause to be thereon submitted.
San Luis Obispo county VS.. Darhe
ct al.-Argued by Swinnerton for
appellant, Spencer for respondent and
submitted.
Straus VS.. Williamson ct al.-Or-
dered submitted on briefs on file.
Porter ct al. vs. Pacific Coast Rail
way Company-Ordered submitted on
briefs on file.
Armstrong VS.. Love-Ordered sub
mitted on briefs on file.
Law VS.. Warden-Cause ordered
advanced and placed ON calendar.
Further ordered that appellant be
allowed 20 days to file briefs and
respondents20 days to answer.
Winterhalter VS.. u. Workman's
Guarantee Fund, &c.-Rehearing de-
MED.
To-DAY's CALENDAR.
The following is the list of cases to
be called to-day:
Bliss vs.. Johnson-Brown & Daggett
for respondent; Atwell & Bradley, for
appellant.
Ruddle VS.. Givens-R. II. Ward,
for respondent; Frank H. Farrer, for
appellant.
NORTH We. Lavalle-W. B. Wallace,
for respondent; w. d. Grady, Oregon
Sanders, for appellant.
Lakeside Ditch Company vs. Crane
ct al.-Atwell & Bradley, M. S. Bah
cock, for respondents; Brown & Dag
gett, for appellants.
Settlers Ditch Companyavs. Hayes
ct al.-ttwell & Bradley, M. S. Bah
cock, for respondent; Brown & Dag
lett, for appellants.
Estate Of Rose, deceased-W. J.
Tuska, w. w. Foote, for appellant;
Stetson & Houghton, for respondent.
Furnish vs. Mullan ct al.-Ghas.
G. Lamberson, for respondent; Fred
erick S. Stratton, for appellants.
Pendergrass VS.. Burns-Sidney V.
Smith, M. s. Babcock, for appellant;
Brown 4 Daggett, Atwell & Bradley,
respondent.
Smith VS.. Talbot-Chas. G.. Lam
berson, for respondent; Brown &
Daggett, for appellant.
Southern Pacific Railroad Company
vs.. Hackett-P. D. Wigginton, for re-
spondent; Burns & Jacobs, for appel
liant.
Southern Pacific Railroad Company
VS.. Farrell-P. d. Wigginton, for re-
spondent; Burns & Jacobs, for appel
ant