Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1895-01-25
THE SUPREME COURT.
10 Action as 10 Tho Partition Of q
Certain Lot Of Land.
SUIT OVER Az APPEAL BOND.
A Contract as to Flock OF Sheep
Arguments On 1htso Ap-
peal, Today.


Contrary 20 their usual custom, tho
iudgs the Territorial supreme court
will DO in so,si0n tomorrow. Saturday
has always been regarded a. an "0nn
day, but owing 90 the pressure uusl.
ucss, and 10 several special matters are
lusi at rtesont on the taps, % has been
decided to have this extra sitting ts
clear thUm OIL
Itis expected, however, that CniI
Justice siouit Will cluluyr Go iuI
time 90 aitarU IlilI district court, tag
csSe Of Singer ys tine Copper Plant 60.
having ucgn specially cot J8wa &c
hearing tomorrow.
\ suU iS rAETuiuS.
The first case assuoI uy council was
that uf william ,. CuuIm.fU, nIsiu.
u1 ANA r,s IUuluui, ya. LtmarIuo &.
IIunt, do.uuuaut anu appellant
Brown uuI Hon .rrDl .0i tho latJ,f;
Buuug,t, MarHhn.l az Bmul,y and a 20
toruuy j.. b. Il. Thompson Tor tue
former.
Aptcal from the Third dls.Ic.--
Chic, Justice Merritt.
Plniutu uuu driruGunt,Ul the Umr ri
the Ming u tuu tul', wufr Joint IWrr.H
ot Inrt ui lot ., bIUcs 90. l.,t CA, Hh
this city. Fraser nud Chalmers had %
lien upon ITuups hglf ui tue llui aHl
Iront a lien u,0n Craimtf'p huli 1897
way Of attachment. Toe action WulsA
iuvolveB tuvcrsl be- uIs, was TOR para.
lion Of iaiI Prentice.
Tbs present appeal b. from On. Otler
OF the district court diminishing aud
stiitiug from the niles tue uf1u.gom.
plant 90 tac defendant
A5 no as APPEAL HlND.
FL, H.. BJuuflr.d, plaintiff and
respondent, Va tuu MourIHla Ice aud
| Cgll slJmgg Co., %. Is. Eiocl aud
John Hell it,, appellants aud rUfpUut.
1nis.
Appeal from Thigi district. Chlei
Justice Merritt.
On May 7th, 1899, plaIutid brought
fuit lghlusi tht 90 . uIsUt company iu
| Justice G7u' u4uu lFIu prscinctl
aud judgment was entered in hlH iavOg
| Or $50 anu $500 costs. -Four dbys
luIrf tic d. Hduuta He'd an under.
| tuFiag GA appeal, upon which the
| defendants Bloch aui He'll became
sureueo,
The point on which the case now
! turns ~ "a narrow one aud arises upon
the plurdiuaa. Bloch (who b. tue
actual appellant, though not 90 shown
10 the caption OF the appeal alleges
that no tigLoi the appeal bond Will
tbs express Undertaking that Il was
not 10 be used until aud unless the
principal should sign ~ hut that II
was used In direct COut.ayontiOu oil
this agreement. Inc only point now
involved ~ whether or not, as matter
If law, the answer constitutes a de-
Tense.
The answer then made wa,
stricken out by the district court a. d
sham anu frivolous aud ia gmun'
given upon the pluadings, ani hence
tno appeal.
Judge Judd appeared fIr the appel
liant; T. Is. Stephens nuI BHnner y
smith tho pendent
OVER A siiErr DIAL.
Franz Jungk and H. J. Fabian,
plaiuuils aul appellants represented
by Williams, Van Colt a. sutherland
AMI Bennett, Marshall q hallcyj v.
ID. q. Reed, a., W. Chopper, J.. Hul'
! NIhNh ANN ~ NAt HAHNlNnt AfINAAAAtl
uud respondents, whose attorneys Wer,
Brown g. Heuderyu.
Appeal from The FlT5l Jlstrict-Juig,
| n, w.. Smith, ON the verdict q d
jury AMI judgment entered Tor lut
defendants, anu from an order denying
now trial The action arose out OF
n contract Tor the purchase VI a large
number Of sheep; question Of part
uouhip IL iuyOlyri, nud also tho iabil.
| 10y ti suruli,B on certain notes pail
| over ON the tIauEurliDu,