Los Angeles herald. [volume] (Los Angeles [Calif.]) 1890-1893, 1891-10-04
The COURTS.
A Number of Decisions
Handed Down Yesterday.
Judge Wade Settles a Number
Of Cases.
No More FlOaters Likely to be
Given.
Tho Savings Banks and Supervisors--
Banbury VS.. Pierce-A Decision
About Floaters-COurt
Notes-New Gases.
Associated Press Dispatches.


Judge Wade yesterday handed down
the following opinion on the motion tc
vacate the writ of review in the cases o.
the Main-Street and Los Angeles Saw
ings banks VS.. the board of supervisors
of Los Angeles county:
"Upon on q careful re-examination OIL
the points and authorities presented in
the briefs of counsel, this motion must
be denied.
Gin People vs.. Dunn go Cal. $500 the
constitutional powers of the state board
of equalization and of county boards
OF equalization, are sufficiently defined
and distinguished for the purpose OF
this motion. The state has powers to
equalize the assessed value of the prop
erty in the various counties of the state.
1t has no control over the procedure OF
the county board.
Neither the state or county boards
of equalization are authorized by the
constitution to add any property to an
assessment roll.
"The effect of q notice given by the
hoard of equalization is not precisely
that OF summons in an action. In the
latter case complaint is filed and
served, to which, or rather to the cause
of action therein. alleged, defendant is
required to appear and plead. II he
appears, whether with or without sum
mons, he is in court for all the purposes
of the action, whereas the notice from
the board of equalization serves the
| purpose not only of summons, but of
| the pleadings in an action. 1t under
takes to state the whole case against the
taxpayer. 1t could not be maintained
| that if notice were served upon a
property owner to show cause why a
road should not be opened through GER
tain premises, advantage could be taken
| OF his appearance in response to such
notice to require him to show cause why
a different road should not be opened
through other and different property.
Sin order to render the notice effect
ual to give Jurisdiction 1T must advise
the party notified of the proposed action
to be taken by the tribunal before which
he appears.
defendant may have, if desired,
thirty DAYS in which to answer the COM
| plants in these actions.
"W. P. WADE, Judge"
The court handed down the following
opinion in the case of Libby vs.. Bar
clay overruling plaintiffs demurrer. In
his opinion Judge Wade said:
plaintiff demurs to the cross-com-
plant filed by one of the defendants
holding the junior mortgage because it
not only sets out mortgage upon this
and other property, but because it
seeks to bring in other parties who
claim no interest in the property
covered by plaintiffs mortgage, but
only in the other property covered by
that Of defendant.
''IG must be conceded ~. that where
additional parties are necessary to an
adjudication of the matters properly
presented by cross-complaint, they may
be brought in.
"(2), That where junior mortgage be-
comes party to suit to foreclose a
junior mortgage, he must in that action
obtain such relief as he is entitled to OF
be forever barred.
"(3l, That but one action can be
maintained for the recovery'of debt
secured by mortgage.
ut seems sufficiently anomolus that
a party, A, may drag into an action be-
tween himself and B and G. a matter in
controversy purely between himself and
D, in which B, the plaintiff in the
original action, has no concern what
ever; but if he may not in this case, il
is difficult to see what is to become oil
the security which defendant holds on
other property than that covered By
plaintiffs prior mortgage.
''The demurrer is overruled."
w. P. WADE, Judge.
BANBERRY VS.. PIERCE.
In the case OF Banberry ct al. VS.
Pierce ct al, an action involving about
twenty eight acres of land in North Pas
adena, Judge Wade ordered findings fol
the plaintiff.
In making the order the court gave
the following opinions
''This case will require very full anC
elaborate findings to cover all the issues
raised by the pleadings of fact, These
were fully indicated from the bench al
the close of the trial. but one motion
was reserved which is a conclusion o.
law. and that is whether the contract by
defendants to pay taxes on the property
invalidated the contract for interest.
CAS- there was no agreement to pay
taxes upon a lien, but rather that de
PENDANTS should pay taxes on their owl
property, it will be held that the judg
ment should be for the plaintiff as to the
interest and principal of the debt.
Findings will be prepared and sub
mitted by counsel for plaintiff.
"W. p. WADE, Judge"
ABOUT FLOATERS.
The Heaton habeas corpus proceed
ings were on i'll department one yester
day, and it looks as though the givini
of "foaters" by the police justices will
be knocked out.
The history of the case was given il
yesterdays HERALD. Heaton was sen
fenced to term in Jail and execution O
the sentence was suspended to ALLOW
him to leave town. He went away bu
returned a short time ago and wa
jailed. His sentence was for 60 days
I a. p r.