Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1894-06-19

,,g u opinions on number Of cases
r,cviou,iy submitted. Several Of them
.,re Of more than usual Interest, and
n,eversals' Of the lower courts were on
ton Among this sppeals passed upon
vs,o dvein which Banker George @.
wbltmoro was the prime mover, and
in three Of ,htm the Court decided In
bis iavOL
ZANE SUSTAINED.
Charles r. Nelson, respondent, VI
the b. l.. Rapid Transit Co., ap.
pcIauts.
Judge Miner rendered the opinion
in this case, Judges Merritt, Batich
and Smith oOnqurring.
Action was brought by plaintiff Nel.
sou to recover damages alleged 10 have
accrued TO him by reason Of bis having
been forolbly elected from one OF the
c0mpany's cars by the conductor. On
tuu tIihl u the cause the jury found Tor
plaintiff IN the sum ot 800.
The dtiendHnt company now no.
signed as error that Nelson violated
rule Of the company by smoking on
the car, anu against tho request VI the
conductor, anu that the damages were
excessive.
rh-ir houoa found from thu record
luAs ,hofe was clear cJuili In tho
testimony, which raised question VI
tact that could only ba passed upon
by the jury; anu uuuer our statutes
Toe jurors were thu Judges NJ the facts,
the cfrdibility Of the witnesses anu OF
the weight Of evidence. The court
below saw tho witncfsvs, heard the evi.
uoucu aud then refused 10 grant new
tful. Their h0n0rs saw no reason Tor
disturbing. the finding, and hence
affirmed the Judgment Of the lJwor
court (JuIgr Iinel.
MNER HLvERsED.
Simon Ouonbufg ct nj, appellants,
" Chss. G. Barnes 1t al, respondents.
Judge smith delivered the opinion,
Judges Aerrit' aul Bartch concerning.
Tons wgsau action Ia the nature OF a
uill In equity ~ SGT aside "a fraudulent
usaigumrut tor the bBurht Of creditors,
Cor the appointment OF u receiver Of
tie assigned estate And for general
Irlle. A demurrer was intcrpotu +,
on the ground that the bill
did not state facts sufficient 10 consti.
tulo a cause Of action, aHd sustained.
Plaintiffs declining u amend, iudg.
mrnt was entered TOT the de'undants;
hence PLAINTIFF appeal.
Their honOTs reversed tbs Judgment
OF tue court below and RENAMED tho
cause with objections to tho presiding
iudge 10 override the demurrer ami
near the case; appellants g. recover
from respondents the costs OF this Ap.
peal.
BARTCu SUSTAINED.
Joseph l.. Gallagher, w. II. Rem
ington anu George NJ. Scott, respond
cuts, W. the Yosemite Mining and
Milling Co., appellants.
Appeal from the Third district
Judge BAttch. THIS was an aston TO
enforce certain trust agreement made
between the parties litigant, the facts
having been stated Ia these col
umps last week on the argu-
mcnts being made. Tho cause
WAS referred a. q foofee, who reported
In favor OF tho plaintiff, finding the
amount due them 10 be s1l, As 0S after
allowing all 0ilsula. Tue court rem
drTcd judgment for this sum, aui de.
creed lea therefor on deicudnnts'
mining property, directing a sale Of
the same 10 pay Judgment aud costs
Motion Tor "a new trial was OYertuled
and from this judgment aud order de,
PENDANTS appealed.
Judge Smith rendered the opinion,
affirming the action Of the court below,
Judges Merritt AMI Miner cjncurriug.
A CRIMINAL CONVICTION UPSET
Tho People Of this Territory, rospond'
ents, vs. Thomas Hart, defendant and
appellant.
Appeal from Third dislriet-Judge
Merritt.
Opinion by Judge Miner Judg,
Barlch concufrirg, Judge s NTH dis
tented, with tbs remark; II concu
In tbs Judgment, ON the ground tina
the evidence WAS Insufficient I,
warrant vtrilct o guilty"
Tue indictment charged Hart with
the crime OIL hOusebrrakiug with lu1eul
u steal at the dwellin room OF Casper
BsssleT, IN the Trlluude block IN tut
city. The Jury on the trial cgnyiciet
hun, ami error was now alleged IN tue
instructions OF tue presl1iug judge
his refusal go give the defendant
requests" insuiiiciunuy VI the evidence
~ Justify this verdict that the verdict
was against the law, Ia that "th,
naked possession" VI revolver taker
from BrsslsTis room was tho only cir
Cumstauce tending 10 show tue defend
anpsguilt.
Their hnnors did not thint there wal
eutlirisnt sytusnCo before the lowe
curt TO Justify conviction Tor lar
ceny had that Oilense been Charge
In the indictment; and they were ais
OF opinion that that tue "uaked posses
alou0 Of stolen property from six 10
twsuty.fuur hours alter the larceny o
hOusebreAlIiug, when unaCc jmpauie,
with any other eliminating tact Or OF
Cumstnuce tending In some degree L
connect the accused with the commls
sion OF tho Uiicnse charged, was no
sufficient testimony In ilsolt upoi
which 60 convict Of nOusubrthklng
The Oilonsu Of hOusehfeaRiug was OF
dinarlly removed one degree turtle
from the act Of larceny, and tho mon
Possession OF stolen goods dii not hav
the same tendency 10 connect th
accused with the burglary Or houst
breaking as It would with tue ihi
ceny. In this case there wa
not sufficient evidence bet0r
the Jury TO Justify the verdict. Tnore
fore the Judgment. VI this lower oour
would DO set aside aud "a new triH
granted.
AND ANOTHER.
The People OF the Territory, plain
am ya Thin AnaIt NgfnuuuuI AN