The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1895-07-30
WILL ENJOY A REST
Nine Decisions Handed Down by the
Supreme Court.
IN THE CASE OF THE B, A. & P.
Regarding Condemnation Proceed
ings Making Good an Agree
ment In n Paint Sale
Helena Election,

Today handed down nine DECISIONS,
clearing up the calendar II all chscs
that have been argued and submitted.
The court then adjourned 70 sept. To-
for the summer vacation. The most
important opinion was that In the case
OF the Butte, Anaconda x Paciftc Rhh-
way company. respondents, vs., Mon
tana Union Railway company, Itah *
Northern and the oregon Short Line
and Utah Northern; from silver Bow
The Judgment and order OF the dis-
trict court viii Le remandcd for mndi-
ficatlon on conformity with the views
expressed in the opinion handed down
and when so modified 1t will stand as
affirmed.
The ~, A. & r.. In order to reach
Butte. had 10 resort 10 condemnation
proceedings for right OF way Ihe
companys only practicable route IN
yolvcd certain property that hal al
ready been condemned for the defead-
ants. but was not in actual use ny
them. The law point raised by the de-
PENDANTS was that land once condemned
for certain road or roads gould no'
be reconhemncd tor another.
The case went TO the district con:t
~ '.,, a.. 100, ,,s, rb.v ,n-
a,,a h", a. s',,,sr,a oonrt bolis
r., a. -, ,.,,Il, -. ,'.,,,,,,sso,,.5 q,
- ~. ,,..,',,i ,,,,1lt. I.
-, - n, ,b., -. ,,ar, those
-, ,,', -. ~ ,ha ,,Iat,,Io,s
49,. ,,,,,,,'..' ,t,.,,,,b, Ia IN the
msn,,r - ,r,ss,nes and r,nlss. Opin-
M by Jus,i,c uunt
r. EYtzgcr,Id rcsnopdep, W.. II.
II u,,so, ,t,r..IIe,t. rrnm Mlssnnla.
IN ,l,t,,fy s,,ad ;, rocovsr f,r SCR
viccs an ,salsfIrg ,.f.rd,nt In rho
,.ra,,,tca ~ ti. nr,r.ss,on pIai,tiff cot
,'.,,ti,, "a 49,, L.,s.,d,,t's r,otl,r
. -. -, -, ,.,l,rr,,i,d e,rom
,st. -. ~. s,,''a1,,, ,n,,.,tcl Tha
-. 80 ,,r,,,,. ~, Aa.tsion ~
80 -. -,
'V" AM, c,,,,
LOUIS h'ns, appelian,, Ns, M @
irrisalhs p''eh eohpsmN resron'sm'
from custer county. ih's ao',o" Wa
or'usnt oy p'aih'ii 10 rceo.e' ,i''
caused 10 MS Ianch oy .ne o'eaN"'7
OF .deiendants rrisaiihs oi'ch, oue 70
alleged hestsehce Oh Tue us'shuan''
ihe jury rehuerea NeFu..' ioi '"s
piaihtiH' whieh Waa SCI asiue on M
tIoh Tor new trlai upon TWO srounus
INSURGENCY OF evidence 10 sustain
the verdict. ana errors OF Jaw ne
order granting the motion Tor new
trial was anirmed by the court opih-
Ion by justice DE VIII.
Joseph Mlchand, respondent. vs.. Geo.
Frelsch-imer, appellant. This was an
action brought by plalntiff To recover
VI defendant the price paid for certain
paint sold by defendant to pllintin on
warranty that 1t was OF hrst-cihss
quality, and for damages occasioncd by
the alleged breach Of the warranty
The answer admitted warranty AS 10
the quality. but denied that the paint
was worthless as alleged IN the com
plaint The damages were also denied.
The case wls tried by jury VINO re-
turned a verdict for the defendant The
court. on motion Of plaintin, set aside
the verdict and granted a motion for a
new trial Defendant appealed from
this order, The order appealed from
was sustained by the supreme court.
Opinion by Chief Justice Pemberton.
Richard q. Wright, appellant We. tho
board ct county commissioners vl