Los Angeles herald., 1891-12-13

| In conformity with the requirement.
of section So of the city charter, CITY
Attorney Mcfarland yesterday filed hi
annual report. The report first shows
the disposition OF each case pending a
the time OF the last report. The results
are here given in BRIEF and in detail
will be published in the New Years
edition of the HERALD:
III. W. Mills VS.. the city-Supreme
court decided in favor of the city.
Main Street and Agricultural Park
railroad VS.. Morford-Verdict for plain.
! tiff.
Louis Phillips and fifty-five others vs.
Len. J.. Thompson and the city-Pltffs
abandon appeal and pay taxes with one
exception.
Alfred Solano ct al. We. Len J. Thomp-
son and the city-Same as Phillips case.
French Benevolent society vs. the city
Case dismissed ON motion of pltff.
Mary A Mooney vs. the city-Case set
for trial the coming week.
Mary A. Mooney We. Morford, the
mayor and the council, to recover
$50, 400 for destroyed trees Set for trial
as above.
Frick Bros. VS.. Acknowledgment
court decision for defdt.
Antonio Vale vs.. the city-Case dis
missed.
Alice Dehail VS.. the city-Superior
court decision against defdt. and ap-
pealed from.
Jesse Yarnell vs.. the mayor and coun-
cil-Supreme court decision against
defdt.
Depot Railway company VS.. the city,
etc.-On opening of Second street.
Cases disposed of, the city abandoning
former proceedings.
The people vs.. city and L. NJ. Bige-
low-Plaintiff has not pressed the
action.
Los Angeles Cemetery association VS..
the city-Pending on appeal in the gu
preme court.
Los Angeles Cemetery association vs.
the city, No. Emotion Of the city for
non-suit granted.
City VS.. Ella M. Linde ct al.-Case
pending.
st. PauPs school vs. the city-Plaint-
if pays costs and city dismisses its APP
peal.
Council VS.. Citizens Water company
Submitted on demurrer to complaint.
H. G. Marsh VS.. city-Won by the
city.
City VS.. NJ. D. Johnson-Case dis
missed.
NEW CASES.
During the past year the following
actions have been instituted, in which
the city or its officers have an interest:
City VS.. Louis Wilson-City won and
recovered judgment for costs.
nv II 1avpa We tho oItv--ftoca 6io-
missed.
H. L. Spencer ct al. vs. council-De-
cision for defendant.
Los Angeles Cemetery association VS..
the city-Decision in the superior
court for city and plaintiff preparing to
appeal.
j. M. Davies VS.. Hutchinson-Suit at
issue.
Davies VS.. Hutchinson ct al.-Suit at
issue.
City VS.. S. @. r. R.-Pending.
w. +. De Groot VS.. city--Pending.
City vs.. Mary G. Adams ct al.-Wait-
ing upon decision in Temple.street case.
City vs.. Alice Dehail-Decision for
defendant and appeal by plaintiff.
City vs. City bank-Submitted.
City VS.. John Long-Dismissed, de-
PENDANT paying taxes and costs.
City VS.. Robert Boswell ct al.
Robert Beyule VS.. board OF education
Two hundred and eighty-three dollars
and sixty-three cents; verdict for de-
PENDANT.
Gilbert Smith VS.. j. NJ. Glass-Case
at Issue and set for trial at next term.
Security Savings Bank and Trust COM
pany vs. Hinton, DISQUALIFICATION
denied, and city had judgment for costs.
Security Savings Bank and Trust COM
Fpany vs. Hinton-Seven hundred and
thirty-three dollars and eleven cents
judgment for defendant.
Main Street Savings bank VS.. Hinton,
$1075.59 Judgment for defendant.
Los Angeles Savings bankv Hinton
S1536.
City vs.. Kaspare Cohn ct al.-Set for
trial next term.
Farmers and Merchants bank VS..
council-Decision for plaintiff and APP
peal to supreme court.