Los Angeles daily herald., 1888-07-10
Department No. 4-Hutton, j.


erees heard and approved and referees
discharged.
Smiley vs.. Lane ct al.-Same as pre-
ceding.
Rohrer VS.. Bila ct al.-Default set
aside except as to Bila.
Barber VS.. Barber-Ten days further
time granted to plead.
Rervis VS.. Commercial Bank of Santa
Ana-Ten days to file bill of exceptions.
Peterson VS.. Peterson-Usual order !;
decree filed and signed.
Sutton vs.. Sutton-Continued till Sep
tember Sd.
Howard Lothian & Co. vs.. Kremer-
Ten days to plead.
Baldridge vs. Wells & Topham-T Ten
days in addition to time allowed by law
to defendants to plead.
Hardy vs. Pullman-Decree ordered
signed and filed.
Jacobs VS.. Jacobs-Decree ordered.
King vs.. Teed, Auditor Demurrer
continued to July - at 2P.M.
King vs. Council of the City of Los An
geles-Same as preceding.
Hansen vs.. City of Los Angeles-Con-
tinued informally.
In re Petition of Pasadena Real Estate
Exchange-Passed informally.
Hamilton vs.. Hazard-Demurrer con-
tinued to September Sd.
Smith VS.. Massee-Demurrer passed
informally.
Davis VS.. Davis-Motion passed to Sep
tember Sd.
Tanner ct al. VS.. Chafer-Demurrer
continued to September Sd.
Tourney vs.. Tounney-Motion contin-
ued to September Sd.
People vs.. Beaudry-Demurrer contin-
ued to September Sd.
Avis VS.. Kalisher-Motion continued
to September Sd.
City of Los Angeles We. Bernero-De-
murrer overruled for want of presenta-
ton; ten days to answer.
Rohrer VS.. Fosset-Demurrer argued
and submitted and by the Court taken
under advisement.
Isenberg vs.. Neal-Demurrer contin-
ued to September Sd.
Elysian Park Street Railway Company
VS.. J. w. Potts-Demurrer withdrawn
and defendant granted ten days to file an
amended demurrer.
Willamette Steam Mill Company VS..
Nurietta-Demurrer continued to Sep
tember Sd.
Jenifer vs. Brownlee ct al.-Demurrer
overruled for want of presentation; ten
days to answer; notice waived.
Gee Gee VS.. Reyes-Demurrer contin-
ued to September 3D..
Maldini VS.. Maldini contin-
ued to September Sd.
Gresham vs.. Aguirre-Demurrer with
drawn and defendant allowed ten days to
amend demurrer.
Barclay vs.. Severance-Demurrer con-
tinued to September Sd.
Smith ct al. VS.. Baker-Demurrer with
drawn and defendant granted ten days
to file an amended demurrer.
McDougall VS.. Howes ct al.-Demurrer
continued to September Sd.
Bryant vs. Bayne-Demurrer overrluled
10 days to answer. Notice waived.
Wetzel vs.. Wetzel ct al.-Demurrer
continued to September Sd.
Florez VS.. Santa Cruz-Same.
Dominguez VS.. Richardson ct al
Same.
Dominguez VS.. McCaleb-Same.
Ellin Bailey, executrix, VS.. Southern
Pacific Co.-Transferred to Department
3.
Griffith & Co. vs.. Culver ct al.-Same.
Shoulderer vs. Farris- Demurrer con-
fessed; 10 days to amend complaint.
WOOuWOItu V6. w WOOu-D0InurT6T anu
motion continued to September Sd.
Bareham vs. Van Pork ct al.--Demur-
rer confessed; 10 days to answer com
plant.
Elchepone VS.. Eracher = Demurrer
overruled by consent; 10 days to answer
Weir VS.. Los Angeles county-Demur
rer continued to September Sd.
Willamette Steam Mill Co. VS.. Loomit
Demurrer submitted on briefs 5 dayl
to defendant and days to plaintiff and
3 days to defendant to reply; thereupor
to stand committed.
Evans vs. Cuddy ct al.-Demmurrel
overruled for want of preservation; II
days answer.
Sanford ct al vs. Rice ct etal.-Dumurre
continued to September 3rd.
Coffee VS.. Swan ct al.-Demurrer. over
ruled for want of presentation; ten day
to answer.
Rich vs.. Guerado-Demurrer overrule,
for want of presentation; ten days t
answer.
Bedwell vs.. Hunt-Demurrer confess
ed; ten days to amend complaint.
Madison vs. Chadwick - Demurre
overruled for want of presentation tel
days to answer.
Haley We. Haley Motion to set cause fo
trial denied.
Mathews vs. Blaisdell ct al-Demurre
overruied ten days to defendant, Blail
dell, to answer; notice waived.
. b. l-|