Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1895-06-13
THE SUPREME COURT.
Cases Claiming tho Attention Of tho
Judges Today.
ANOTHER sun ron DAMAGES.
II Is Submitted Without Argument
Applications for Admission
10 the Bar.

At today's session Of the Supreme
court the applications OF WIN. n.
u'Biion and Geo. e. Wet OF Ogden,
'ur admi7sion to Practice NJ the bar,
were received anu referred to tho cam.
miiiee On examination Of applicantT.
The case oil the Flrt National Bank
Of Nophi, Va Charl,s Fo0te ct al, appel
innis, which was fUt Tor yesterday, was
not submitted uuul today. J. q.
Sutherland End 5. r. Thurman, ar-
guei Tor appellant aud George suther
land Tot respondents.
suEm1rED OK nutEFs.
The case Of Sarah j.. Chapman, nm
infant, By John /. Chapman, her
guardian al Item, plaintiff and
tesrondout, VI Union Pacific Rail.
way company anu the Utlh Northern
and Oregon short Line Railway COM
pany, defendants aud appellant, wSs
oubmilied on hrlois without argument.
The suit was brought In the First
| district clutt nj Provo for sg5, 900
| damages Tor personal iniufiua received
by tue plaintiff while crossing the
def udanis' tfacK. IL IL alleged that
thu plniutIil, who was hut three years
oi aye, on oct Let, 1893, attempted 10
| cross the railway ttRck near American
| FORK static ,wueu her foot was caught
between The rail aud plank which
hnd been placed there, and she WAS
not able 10 eNtticate hetsolL While in
| THIS pUhiiiou u passenger train came
! A e. "A .asN - a
ran over her, crushing and mangling
her right foot and seyoring II from her
/ body. IL II alleged that the accident
was the result Of tho negligence aud
catelsssress Of deiendants' employees.
10 answer tue defendants deny the
allegations Of plaintiff anu allrgo that
/ the injury was the result OF the care.
| lessness " tbs PLAINTIFF guardians.
] On the trial OF the case la the lower
| court judgment vas rendered Ia favor
| OF plHintin TOT $40, 500. The motion for
a now trial was oyenuled, anu the
defendants appealed 10 the Supreme
| court ON tho ground that the lower
court erred In admitting certain testi.
muny and also that the dAmag Go
allowed AFRO excessive.
TO RECOVER GOODS.
The case OF Thomas l.. Leedom ct
al, plaintiffs aud respondents, W..
Ehrls Furniture ~ Carpet company
And /. A. Boutou, United SlAtos mar
shai, defendants and appellants, was
taken w this afternoon. The case IL
appealed from the Judgment Of Judge
liattch Ia tue Third district.
The action was originally brought 10
recover possession OF certain goods and
ohattelz said TO have been delivered by
plaintiffs o le'tn ants, and for which
they hal ut received payment, or the
value thereof, amounting ~ $1,000,
aud for $500 damages, lhs plaintffa
alleged that through fraudulent anu
pretended purchases defendants OBJ
taiued possession OF the goods Ia ques.
uOu; chat the defendant company was
insUIytnt at tho time OfsAlG purchases,
which fact was we'll known to th0
agents Of defendant, anu thRt the pre-.
tended purchases were made with the
pfecOnCeived intention OF the company
not 10 pAy for the gOUdg.
/. A. Beaten, United States MaTehAl,
In answer, dggies tue allegations VI
fraud anu that he unlawfully with,
holds tue goods SPOKEN o. On tue trial
OF this case Judgment was rendered In
favor OF plaintiffs, tho value OF the
goods being placed NJ 1881 .68, aud the
damages ut f77ss. A motion for =
nov trinl was Ovefruled anu au appeal
was taken to tho Supreme court