Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1893-06-08
SUPREME COURT BUSINESS.


This has been light day In the
Territorial Supreme court, the pro.
gram having been run through by
ll:lj, at which time al Adjournment
was taken until tomorrow morning.
Their honors will continue to cit from
Jay 10 day until tho 28i inst, when
the session viii close.
BALANCE oy Az ACCOUNT.
W. IS. Henderson, plaintiff and
respondent, W. Cnaf,s5 w. Higg.nt,
Thomas Il. Higgins, and Edward T..
Scar, delcnIauu; Charles W. Hig-
glue appellant. Tnc action was COM
menocd IN Commissioner Greenman's
court on August 3lst, 1892, to recover
a balance ~ s2il.02 claimed to 10 duo
upon an account u plaintiff from de.
PENDANTS M co-partnerb under the firm
uamu Of Ssars Il Higgins. Charles
W. Higgins denied that no was
mumter Of the tirm aud also all tho
allegations IN the complaint. Judg.
muut was rendered against the two
Higgins Tor s2iG.A5 and c0sts taxed az
flIul. Tho matter was carried 10 tho
ruird diB'rio; court, anu the appeal
dismissed. Motion was afterwards
made TO vacat such order and to re-
instu e the appeal. This was overruled,
uud hence the present appeal 10 tue
supreme court
FOR TOMORROW.
Tho case Of J. Q. Armstrong ct al,
plaintiffs anu appellant, vs. Ogden
cry et ali dcienlaulH and respondents,
was 10 have bHon next argued, but
owing 10 the unavoidable Absence Of
| Attorney J, NJ. kimnail the nrgu-
mruts were deferred until tomorrow
/ morning. IL was AN action brought by
| plaintiff, who are residents aud tax.
payers OF Ogleu, 20 OBTAIN an Injunction
| restraining the defendants, wnO con.
sututo the city council, from leyying "A
| special assessment upon the property
Of the plaintiff anu other persona,
/ situate urou pwenty.tlith street, In
| paving district No. ., from creating
any cloud upon their title, f,om entst-
Ing into a contract for the paving Of
! the thOgOughiAru named anu also ASK.
/ Ing that the notice OF Intention 10
| rave be declated insufficient anu
| illegal, The defendants demuTTed u
! he complaint. The demurrer was
sustained by the Fourth District court
| nul tho temporary restraining order
! Dissolved, Against this ruling Of
Judge Miner this appeal Is taken.
MISCELLANEOUS.
In tho case OF j. II. Meyers, APPEL
| liant, vs. l.. b, Adams et al (lTOm the
| Fourth district, the motion ~ dis
| mics was allowed.
The same order was made In the
case o. the Central Pacific Railroad
/ company VI OAkessu ct al.
Also In the appeal OF John II. Voor.
hees VI Jennie A. Fisher, appellant.
The case Of Thomas II. Higgins, up.
| pvligut, Va Salt Lake City OF al, was
dismissed on motion OF counsel for
the appellant,
COURT NOTES.
In the Third district court last even
lug, Mile Dugsn filed suit for
divorce against her husband, John j.
Dugan. The marriage took place in
this city Ia 1880, and these are two
| children. The plaintiff alleges that
| curing all their married lie the de-
ienlnnt has wiliuly failed and neg
leCted TO support her ana has treated
her In IA cruel an inhuman manner. At
the time OF the birth OF their LAST
child he TenglnedaWay from her three
days anu nights, and she would have
died Tor want OF care had II not bee
for the charity Of friends. At other
times he abused hershameiully,a accused
her Of having ueen untrue to him, anu
Knocked her down. Plaintiff asks for
a decree OF divorce, the custody Of tho
children and alimony.