The record-union., 1894-03-15
SUPREME COURT DECISIONS.
Two Cases Concerning Sacramento
County Litigants.
Fine For Contempt of Court Confirmed
"A swamp Land Assessment
Declared Void.

The Supreme Court has decided the
case of Natoma Water and Mining Com
pany, respondent, VS.. John Hancock
and Joseph Wild, appellants, a Sacra
mento case. being an appeal from an
order adjudging defendant, Joseph Wild,
guilty of a contempt of court and impos-
ing fine of $3.50 therefor.
Upon complaint filed by plaintiff at
the commencement of the action an order
was granted, enjoining defendants from
doing certain things, pending hearing
of an injunction asked for.
1t was for alleged violation of this order
that The fine was imposed. An appeal was
taken. but the Supreme Court decides
that the order is not appealable, and it
therefore disnisses the appeal.
COMMUNITY PROPERTY MUST BE ASSESSED
TO HUSBANDS.
The Supreme Court has decided the
case OF William GWynn, Jr., appellant, VS..
ID. DlerSsen, respondent, a Y olo County
action, to quiet title, and on an appeal
from ORDER denying new trial.
Plaintiff claimed the land through a
succession OF deeds, beginning with one
to his mother, Cornelia S. Gwynn, from
w. b. Taylor in 1880. All that time and
"
IFS father.
Dierssen claims title under certificate
| OF sale from the Sheriff OF Yolo County,
dated April Is, 1891. pursuant to a decree
rendered against Cornelia s. Gwynn,
June II, 1888, foreclosing a swamp land
assessment.
The court holds that the title from Tay-
lor TO Cornelia 5. Gwynn vested the title
in the marital community, and that the
assessment being levied against her was
void and did not affect the title OF Will
lam GWynn, who conveyed it to plaintiff.
The order appealed from is reversed.
REvIvING a MORTGAGE.
The case of r. Shaffer, plaintiff and re-
spondent, VS.. II. a. McCloskey ct ais,
defendants and appellants, Merced
County case, has also been decided.
The action was brought for decree re-
v1vlng mortgage and subrogating it
to the rights Of the assignee of the mort
gage.
Shaffer and McCloskey bought the land
from one Fahey, giving him a mortgage
for part payment McCloskey could not
pay his share when it became due, and
under his promise that he would deed his
undivided half of the property to Shaffef,
the latter paid it all. He did so, but pre-
viously executed deed of trust for it 10
John Ruddle for the benefit of the Mer-
judgment, and McCloskey and the bank
appealed.
The Judgment is affirmed.
\ FRESNO LAND CASE.
Decision has also been made in the
case OF .. /. Abbott, appellant, VS.. the rs
Land and Water Company, respondent
The action is for the specific perform
ance Of an alleged contract to convey
half section OF land, with certain appurte-
nant wafer rights. in the county OF
Fresno. The parties had executed lease
of the land, and Abbott claimed a right
to purchase under il.
The court holds that the lease in cues
ton differed from other leases made by
respondents. III that it did not give ap-
pellant the right to purchase, and there
fore atfirms the judgment and order ap-
pealed from.
A TULARE COUNTY CASE
decision has also been rendered in
the case OF d. l.. HeaIy ct al, respond
ents, VS.. the Visalis and Tulare Railroad
Company. appellant, Tulare County
case.
The plaintiffs are husband and wife.
and on May 20 1890, took passage with
defendant from Nisalia to Tulare. Com
ing to washout they were transferred,
be carried to Tulare. Mrs. Healy sat in
front, with her feet hanging down, and
after going some distance the hand-car
left the track, and she fell to the ground
and was run over and seriously injured.
Action was brought. and the Jury gave
her verdict for 81 200 damages.
The company appealed, objectlng to
certain testimony which was allowed by
the court The judgment is affirmed.