Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1901-01-07
FURNITURE CASE
OPINION TODAY.

The Supreme court today handed
down three opinions the first one In
the case Of Samuel Il Auerbach, re-
spondent, VS. salt Lake county This
Is an important case, involving $4,000
IN county warrants. issued by the old
county court away back In 1894 on a
contract made with Andrews & Co. Of
Chicago. by the county In purchasing
furniture for furnishing the couniy's
half Of the joint building The war;
rants We're transferred by Andrews &
Company TO the respondent who pre-
scented them for payment. which was
refused on the part Of the county this
being after the charges Of fraud had
bean ALLEGED in connection with this
deal The subsequent county officials
claimed that conspiracy had been en-
tered into between this furniture cons
pany and the old members OF the coun-
Is court. by which the county fraud
ulently paid a great deal more Tor me
goods than they We're worth, etc. ana
mat the present holder OF the warrants
took them with full knowledge of these
facts. and on these grounds payment
was resisted.
Sult was brought IN the lower court
which held that in3smuch as the c'uA-
tv elected 90 retain the furniture tlal
| Andrews & Company might recover lor
lis value. and as respondent bought
the warrants for value. that Dee was en-
titled to recover On whatever claim An
drews * Company had, and this luds-
ment-Sl4 -Ol-Was affirmed Win IN
| terest from February 10. 1888, at eight
Judge Bartch delivered the opinion.
Judges Miner and Bas6in concurlns
FOR KILLING A BOY.
The mex, decision was In the case OF
J. Beaman. plaintiff ana resp9,n.,l-.. hI
vs. The Martha Washington M'Ii.i's
company defendant and appellant lns
action was brought In Che llslllc, coui !
bv Reaman for the negligent Nll.ns OF
his minor son by defendant c1Ihptht
I'm its mine. 10 Is claimed by ine ialh-
ar that the boy was hired to DO eh'its
around tha works 90 The Top OF H.
mine but that the defendant haa sem
him down in the mine l1 perform s'."l
work. and the boy NOT being iam..l'
with the underground Workings was
through the negligence of the company
killed .,.,... .,,.,
nrairuN iuEem.u. 'Ir $4,000 lamasrs
ana 9n motion Cor new iTil. was d. hltI
uuTu plaintiff RENTING Nu' oi th,s
ylr5iri and the defendant appealed
tr9pa Hart of Logan acting as one OF
me- Surr.ue iulg s. rendered ih. ,pIh'
lon affirming iha Judgment OF me low.
sr r1grt which Was cIncuuei IN uy
JUDGES Baskn and Cherry
CASE RENAMED
An opinion was also handed down IN IN
a.. rrs. rf Annie GHrriugt. p.3'niH
,rl aursIl4nt vs William S Reed. dc,
t'r5.rf Plaintiff lives In ogden. ana
ALLEGES Iu her complaint iha' 'n ',,ui
b.r %. 1899. she was ny duI,'s "'"
through fear compelled 90 eAeeo.,.'e, .,
1sal tl her homestead valued q. 49,
conveying 10 t0 one Reed. as DE 'lI,',,
nal %. have har husband imprisoned II
.bs r.rff.ufflry ou charge oi s.Ah1
i5r.'ry If she d.d no, make TINS N'e''
,,rish WAS without amy fJnsilelA,l.l.
H. tha lower court tha p.a'ntu was
,lr.suits5 on hg ground NAT she az
.,.l,..l sr. executed tha deco Tor ''y
,',r,.... NJ clmu1uni.Ug a felony aIl
h1t In. was therefore On par a.nllo
Len ,r. Grantee Mr. Reed. This luls-
WIZ, ' .'.. -.y.rsa1 and the case re-
menu t.,,.t ts trial court with IN