The herald., 1894-08-16
Mr.. BROWNS APPEAL.
THE SUPREME COURT GIVES HIM
ANOTHER CHANCE.
Batch OF Decisions Resolved Yester-
day in Gases of Interest in South
ern Californis-LsRaI Point
ers Briefly Told.

The supreme court has reversed the
superior court of Los Angeles county in
the case OF G. II. Brown, plaintiff and
appellant. VS.. board of education OF Po-
mona, defendant and respondent, in
accordance with an opinion received for
filing yesterday by Deputy Clerk Sesnon.
The superior court sustained demur-
rer to the complaint upon the ground
that it did not state facts sufficient to
constitute cause of action. The plain
tin declined to amend, and judgment
was rendered for the defendant, from
which the appeal was taken.
Ii was averfed in the complaint that
at the city's request the plaintiff made
and delivered to it certain plans and
specifications for two public school
buildings to be built in Pomona; that
they were approved, accepted and
adopted by the city; that the plaintiff
was entitled to pay for his services. and
the city has refused to give it.
The supreme court says that in this
case it ie clear that the question in.
volved ia a pure question OF pleading.
The form of the complaint the court
holds was sufficient, and concludes ::
they may appear when properly pre-
sented, we cannot deal on this appeal.
Ii the contract sued on was invalid or
void, or if for any reason it was one
which appellant cannot enforce, respond
emit can defeat the action upon sufficient
answer and evidence. But We think the
conrt erred in sustaining the demurrer.
The Judgment is reversed, with instruc-
vii v1vk tn 10
the demurrer to the complaint.
The judgment of the superior court Of
San Diego county is affirmed in the case
of Minnie j. Herman, respondent, Va.
Milton Santes ct AL, appellants. This
was an action brought to foreclose q
mortgage given to secure payment of q
promissory note made by the appellant,
Milton Santee. September 9, 1892, a
decree OF foreclosure was entered by de-
fault. Subsequently the appellant
moved to set aside this decree as far as
it provided for q deficiency Judgment
against him. on the ground that previ-
GUS to the institution of the action he
had been discharged from the indebted
ness sought to be enforced. by a dis
charge in insolvency. The respondent,
before the hearing, presented an amend
ed affidavit OF service of the summons
and complaint in the case, and moved
that they be filed snd made part of the
judgment roll, which was granted. The
appeal was from this order and the
judgment. The supreme court holds
the judgment was not void, and that the
court did not err in permitting the
amended affidavit of service to be filed.
The judgment Of the superior court of
Los Angeles county is reversed by the
supreme court in the case Of S. White,
appellant, We. Charles T. Harris, ct al. /,
respondents. 1t WAS an action to fore
close lien alleged to have been created
upon the defendants lot for the con-
struction OF q sewer in front of IL, and
along the streets described in the com :
plant. A general demurrer was sus-
tanned by the court, and judgment went
for the defendants. the appeal being
taken from the Judgment roll alone.
The only ground urged On appeal
upon which the complaint was held to
be insufficient by the court below, was
that it failed to allege the formation OF a
district upon which should be charge
able the expense and cost OF construct
ing the sewer as required by section 81
OF the act approved March 49, 1885.
The supreme court holds that the
superior court erred in sustaining q
demurrer upon this ground. The re-
naming point was that the contratt
under which the sewer was constructed
did not fix the date for the commences
ment OF the work, which the su preme
court says is not we'll founded. The
court below Ia directed to override the
demurrer.
In the San Diego case of John E.
High, plaintiff and appellant, VS.. the
Bank OF Commerce, defendant and re.
spondent, the judgment of the lower
court is affirmed. Plaintiff had money
judgment versus Comstock & Trotsche,
co-partners, and having procured an ex.
ecution to be issued, and claiming that
the defendant was indebted to their firm
proceeded to sue the bank. The court
found that at the time the proceeding
was instituted the bank was not indebted
TO the firm and had not money or prop
erty belonging to them. The supreme
court sees no reason to reverse this de.
cision.
The Kern county case of Alfred A.
Davis, plaintiff and respondent, We.
Josiah H. Hart. defendant and appel
liant, is reversed, there being no brief on
file by respondent, nor was it orally
argued in his behalf. and the findings
were attacked on insufficiency OF the
evidence.
The judgment OF the Los Angeles
superior court was affirmed in the case
OF German Pablisier. respondent, We.
Aurel,a J. Corker, appellant. The &C.
ton was brought to secure perpetual
injunction to restrain the defendant
from obstructing an alley way between
the lots OF the parties. The injunction
was granted, and the appeal WAS taken
from the Judgment and order denying a
new trial. The defendant claimed the
title in fee to the land included in the
alley and based her right to obstruct it
on deeds she held. After discussing the
points raised the court holds that the