The herald., 1893-10-13
GRINDING OUT DECISIONS
THE SUPREME COURT SENDS
DOWN IA FRESH OPINIONS.
Tho City Loses Its City Bank Interest
Cnse George Abbott Gets
New TriaI-Other
Cases.

The supreme court sent down another
4 big lot OF opinions yesterday to Deputy
. Clerk sesnon, deciding IL cases OF inter-
est In this part of the state.
One OF the cases decided was that OF
the city of Los Angeles We. the City
bank. involving the right Of the city to
4 collect interest on city money deposited
in the bank under contract with the
q city.
y Thie contract in the case Of Yarnell
& VS.. the city OF Los Angeles ct al. was
declared unconstitutional and void.
4 The present case was tried before Judge
Shaw, who rendered judgment in favor
( OF the city for the sum OF $972l.54, and
3 an appeal "a taken for the bank by
n Mesars. Burnett 4 Gibbon, and the su..
A preme court reverses the judgment OF
" the lower court. IL holds the city mot
entitled to any interest on the money
while the bank held it, on the ground
that the contract under which the
money was deposited having been de.
fclared void and unconstitutional, the
deposit took the form OF q simple de-
poeit In commercial bank, for which
Interest could not be recovered. The
court below is also directed to dismiss
the action.
M GEORGE ABBOTT GETS NEW TRIAL.
The supreme court reverses the judg-
ment Of the superior court in the case
Of George Abbott and grants.him q new
4 trial. He was convicted OF burglary and
sentenced to five years in the penlten'
tiary.
This is the case where George Abbott,
his brother Amos Abbott and Robert
n Acevedo were accused of taking q trunk
from the room of Chinaman, Ah Sic,
September 5, 1891. The new trial ia
granted on the ground of numerous
errors OF law and In instructions by the
lower court, and the court says that the
brief Of the attorney general IL the case,
signed by his first deputy, is little more
than q pert. if not impertinent denial
that there is anything Of merit in the
alleged errors referred to by appellants
counsel.
OTHER CASES.
The court affirms the judgment of the
lower court in the case OF Juan M. Luco,
appellant, vs.. Juan de Toro, respond
ent, which has been in the courts for
years.
The Judgment is reversed in the case
OF ]. II. Fountain ct al, PLAINTIFF and
respondents, We. the Semi .Tropic Land
and Water company, defendant and ap-
pellant. 1t was an action to rescind q
land contract. Both parties seek re-
cisson. The supreme court holds that
the Judgment Of the lower court cannot
stand.
Judgment is affirmed in the case Of
Sallie d. Stephenson, respondent, va.
the Southern Pacific company, appel
liant. The plaintiff had judgment for
$4,000 damages for injuries. She was in
q street car on San Fernando street
when q switch engine came along. She
jumped and received the injuries COM
planned Of The opinion is quite long
and goes into thorough review. OF the
testimony and instructions. finding no
material errors.
In the case OF the New Zealand Insur-
ance company, respondent, vs.. George
Brsdbeer, appellant, the judgment and
order of the lower court are affirmed.
The defendant was agent of the cum
psny, and the suit was for money COL
lected and not turned over by him.
Judgment went for the plaintiff for
$798 95. The contention of appellant
was that the fRdings were not justified
by the evidena
The judgme the lower court is ai-
firmed in til gase of the Los Angeles
Farming and Milling company. respond
ents, vs. Hof ct al, appellants. 1t was
an action OF ejectment against defendant
Hoff and 100 others to recover possession
OF the south half OF the San Fernando
rancho. The court holds that the
plaintiff has been in actual possession,
under sanction of judicial decree, for
25 years, and that the defendants are
mere naked trespassers.
In the two cases Of Edwin A. Meserve,
appellant, vs. the Pomona Land and
Water company, respondent. the order
appealed from is affirmed. 1t was an
action to recover damages and for an in
junction. The defendants had judg-
ment. The plsiutiffs claimed 567 10.
1000 Of the water OF the San Antonio
cafion.
In the case Of L. Mssnagsr ct al. vs.
Hamilton ct al, the submission was set
aside aud the cause placed on the Los
Angeles bank calendar for argument.
The order of the superior court grant
ing new trial in the case of w J..
Shsnklin, appellant, VS.. J. III. Hall,
respondent, is affirmed. 1t wae an ac-
tion to recover for services rendeged in
the exchange OF certain real estate.
Judgment went for the plaintiff and the
appeal was from the motion granting q
new trial. The supreme court says the
conclusions of law were erroneous. and
en- appeal from the Judgment would
have been reversed.
In the divorce case of Warner, appel
iant, vs. Warner ct al, respondent.
an order changing the trial OF the case
from San Bernardino to Los Angeles
county IL affirmed.
The judgment of the superior court is
affirmed in the case of Klauber ct al,
plaintiffs and respondents We. the San
Diego Street Car company, defendant,
appellant.
The judgment of the San Berdardino
superior court in the case of N. w.
Stowell, respondent, vs.. w. J. Wadding-
ham ct al, appellants, was reversed and
the cause remsnded.
PARK COMMISSIONERS.