Los Angeles daily herald., 1888-07-03

plaintiff have leave to take papers in said
case for the purpose of engrossing state
ment on motion for "a new trial.
Recess until July 9th.
Department No. 4-HuttOn, j.
Judges Gardiner, C'Melveny and Hut
ton sat in bank to rearrange the calendar
for the July term trial session.
The following causes were passed for
the session:
Dominguez vs.. Huse ct etal.-Injunction.
Parker VS.. Cohn-To quiet title.
Louis VS.. Mesa-To quiet title.
Barclay ct al, Medlin ct ALTO quiet
title.
Phelan vs.. Pallet-Partition.
Frankel vs.. Hellman-Promissory note.
Baldwin VS.. Welch-Possession
Azusa Water Developing Co. vs. Mar
shall-Injunction.
Waterhouse vs. Huckins-Damages.
Mcpherson VS.. L. A. County Bank
Account.
Alvarado vs.. Nordholt-To quiet title.
Garibaldi vs.. Fulton ct al.-Injunction.
Eschelbach vs.. Observation-Disclosures
Spencer VS.. Chelf-Account.
Figueroa VS.. Leidel-Possession
Reed vs.. Morton ct al.-Contract.
Hewes VS.. German Fruit Company
Damages.
Cordano vs. Whariet ct al.-Damages.
Avilia vs. Bragg-Possession.
Kelley ct al. VS.. Matlock-Promissory
note.
McCulloch vs.. Whiting-Account
German Fruit Company vs.. w. N. Til
& Co.-Damages.
Hall VS.. .Weyse-Attachment.
Schramon vs.. Southern Pacific Railway
ompany-Damages.
Davis vs.. Harris-Damages.
Grow vs.. Belz-Quietti title.
Fleck VS.. Kirkton and Schurtz-Labor.
Brown & Foster Hardware Co. vs.
Observation-Disclosures lien.
Maloney vs. Powelson-Account.
Baker VS.. Brown-Contract.
Podgham VS.. Reuter- ct al.-Attach-
ment.
Clark vs.. Clark-Diyorce.
Smith ct al. vs.. Baker-Contract.
Henderson VS.. Los Angeles and Glen
dale Railway Company-Injuries.
Palmer ct al. VS. Aguirre-Claim and
delivery.
Harsh VS.. Winters-Note.
Abstract Title and Insurance Company
vs.. Boyce ct al.-Account.
Kerchof Gunner Manufacturing and
Lumber Company vs.. Scammon-Ac-
count
Smith ct al. VS.. Stewart-Attachme
Baker vs. Brown-Annul contract.
Macneil vs.. Geo. Morgan-Injunction
Ogden VS.. Mclaughlin title.
Hellman vs.. Weyse etal.-Foreclosure
Storrs vs.. Elmo ct al.-Foreclosure.
Union Publishing Company vs.. Whit
taker-Account.
Ruckinpham va Chadwick
Pico ct al. vs.. Taylor-Foreclosure
Lichtenberger vs.. Zobelein-Note.
Baker Iron Works vs.. Edgmont Land
and Water Company-Attachmen
Breakey vs. Lammert ct ALIEN.
Ellis VS.. California Southern and
Arizona Freight and Passenger Transfer
Company-Damages.
Pendleton & Williams vs. Cline-Ac-
count
Shatto vs.. Crocker-Damages.
Perham vs.. Creditors.
Smith vs.. Masters-Possession.
Irilary vs. Irilary-Divorce.
Taniere ct al. vs.. Schmidt ct al.-Ac-
count.
Kerby vs. California Central Railroad
Company-Damages.
Sanchez VS.. Rheim ct al.-Quiet title.
Pico vs.. Olivas-Ejectment.
Davenport ct al. VS.. Sketchley ct al
Claim.
Kaufman vs. Name ct al.--Damages.
Scott VS.. Mccartney ct al.-Quiet title.
Rupert vs. Kays.
Chicago Brewing Co. VS.. Guisner.
Wright ct. al. vs.. Dorsey-quiet title.
Balorim VS.. Bills cases.
Briggs VS.. briggs.
bartholomew VS.. Barman.
Abbott vs.. johnson ct al.
Allen VS.. San Jose Land and Water
Co.
johnson VS.. WINS.
The following cases were passed in
formally:
Haley vs.. Haley-Divorce.
Brandt vs. Clark ct al.
Gage vs.. Hubbell ct al.
jackson vs. Duane.
Maldin vs. Maldin.
Legs vs. Legs.
Weyse VS.. Crawford.
Endel VS.. Gottschalk.
Stricken from the calendar:
lfBuhler vs.. Tow-Dis. Parts.
Levan vs.. Lindley ct al.
Short vs. Crosby-Claim and deliv-
cry.
Brown and Foster Hardware Co. vs..
Pratt ct al.-Mechanic's lien.
Perry vs.. Pratt etal.-Mechanic's ct lien.
Wagner and Company vs.. Creditors.
In re guardianship of Jane Weir, in
competent.
LIE Long vs.. Eyrand-Quiet title.
SET FOR DEPARTMENT NO. 2.
Root & ESns Music Co. vs.. Chadwick
July 30.
Ricn VS.. Burbank ct al-September 25.
Fairview Development Go. vs. Kent
ct al-September 26.
Charles vs, September ~.