Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1890-05-11

1851. THE Cor-pT
is.iSs and ls.72o--McLear VS.. HapsoodMou
motion of Black and suggestion of d,minution
of record, ordered that he be allowed 10 file an
amended transcript herein. Further ordered.
appellant be allowed twenty days to file brief.
case to be thereupon submitted.
People VS.. Bagley ct al-Motion of Carter to
advance aud place cause on calendar granted.
Ordered appellant be allowed ten DAYS 10 file
brief, respondent ten days to reply. appellant
five days TO reply thereto; cause TO be thereupon
submitted.
Is, 526-Landregan VS.. Peppin-On motion of
Robinson. ordered respondent be allowed
twenty days TO file brief; appellant twenty tiays
to reply; cause to be therenpou submitted.
lS,54S-Roseburg ct al. VS.. Ford-On motion of
appellant, ordered submitted upon briefs on file.
lS,54l-Chatfield VS.. Williams ct al-By con-
sent. ordered submitted upon briefs on file
13.572-Crew VS.. Diiler ct al.-On motion of
Belcher, appellant allowed twenty DAYS 20 file
brief, respondent twenty days TO reply; motion
to dismiss and cause to be thereupon submitted
blanchard, ordered appellant be allowed twenty
days to file brief, respondent ten days to reply:
cause to be thereupon submitted.
l3,07l-Wise ct al. VS.. Williams ct al-Pursl,-
ant to stipulation, ordered respondent be al
lowed ninety days to file biief. appellant thirty
days to reply: cause TO be thereupon submitted.
1896, Without ct al. VS.. Cunningham-lS4 96,
Sargent ct al VS.. Cunningham-By consent or.
dered appellant have twenty days to file brief,
respondent twenty days TO reply. appellant ten
days to reply thereto: cause to be thereupon
SuDmlsteu.
1859 and Is, 570-Johnson VS.. Vsnce-Pursu.
ant to stipulation, ordered respondent have
twenty days to Tile brief, appellant twenty DAYS
to reply; cause to be thereupon submitted.
lSo.s-Clayey, administrator, VS.. Lord-Pur.
suant to stipulation, ordered appellant have
forty days to file brief, respondent forty days to
reply, appellant twenty days to reply thereto
cause to be thereupon submitted.
lS,459-Hewlett vs. Pelcher-Pursuant to slip.
ulation, ordered submitted upon briefs on file
l3,5zS-Estate of Gritfith-Argued by Strattau
for appellant, Campbell for respondent, and sub
mitted Counsel consent that the Chief Justice
In the decision of this cause.
lS,14o-Sanders VS.. Russell-Argued by Catlir
for respondent. Ordered appellant have twenty
days TO hie brief, respondent ten days to reply
cause to be thereupon submitted. Counsel con
sent that the Chief Justice and all the Associ
ate Justices may participate in the decision o
this cause
Adjourned until 10 A. NJ. tomorrow.
IN BANK.
FRIDAY May 9th.
l2,O64-Carson VS.. Berson; T. 769-Joshua IT
Mch. Wks. VS.. American s. B. Trs On of Nav
York; Il, 759-McMenomy VS.. Band; Il, 6ss-obm
VS.. City and County of San Francisco; II, GIG
Reynolds VS.. Borel; 13,Sl4-Fiske VS.. Soule
L, oO9.Flickinger vs. Shaw; u, e-Greenebaun
vs. Martinez 12,7S4-Grant VS.. Ede-Thes.
causes having been heretofore referred to De
partment Two for hearing and Determination
and no decision having been arrived AT anC
good cause appearing therefor. it is ordered tina
the causes be heard and determined by tn,
Court in bank RFATTv n
lS.52S-Estate of Grifith-0rder affirmed.
,s:.. THE COURT.
SATURDAY, May 10TH
l2,5ol-Mooney VS.. Detrick-The requisit,
number of Justices who were qualified an(
heard the argument in this case not having ar
rlyed al conclusion it is ordered that the sub
mission herein in bank be set aside land tn,
cause stand resubmitted upon the briefs now OF
NE 10 the Court IN bank for decision.
THE CoURr.
SATURDAY, May 10th.
Present.; Beatty G. j. tpresiding); Sharpstein
J. Mct aTland, j.; Paterson, j.; Fox, J;Spencer
Clerk; Washburn Bailif.
Admission of w. A. Orion motion of 81. NJ
Alberry, Esq, and presentation of diploma from
the Vanderbilt Law College emitting him Il
practice in all the Courts of the State of Ten
nessee, and evidence of good moral character, Il
ordered that w. A. Orr be and he is hereby ad
mitted to practice as an attorney and counseIoI
in all the Courts of this State.
W,6l5-People VS.. HARRISON motion of Dep
uty Attorney General Johnson, appellant con
present bank calendar. Further ordered an
pellant have twenty days to file brief respond
ept twenty days to reply, appellant ten days tc
reply d there.o; cause to be thereupon submitted
l3,4H-Colusa County VS.. Hudson-Argued by
Mckune Tor appellant, Alberry for respondent
and submitted Counsel consent that Justices
works and thornton may participate i'll the de
cision OF this cause.
l3,363-sukeforth VS. Lord-Argued by Ruskin
for appellant, Cross for respondent. Ordered
appellant have ten days to file reply brief cause
70 De thereupon submitted. Counsel consent
that Justices Works and Thornton NAV partici
pate in the decision of this cause
2o.6Io.People VS.. Ross-Argued by Scanlan
Tor appellant, Deputy Attorney General for re-
spondent and submitted Counsel consent m a,
Justices Works and Thornton may participate
in the decision of this cause
Adjourned for the session.
l3,ZI2-Estate of Osborn-This cause having
been heretofore referred to Department One for
decision and no conclusion having been arrived
at, 1t is ordered that the cause be heard and de.
termlned by the Court in bank BEATTY. CT
IL, 5e4-Vierci VS.. Dobyus-The appeal in this
cause must be dismissed, and il is SO ordered.
THE COURT