Omaha daily bee., 1903-02-04
submitted in the supreme court this morn


submitted in the supreme court this morn
ing.
Union Pacific Railroad company against
Stanwocd; Genau against Abbott. two
cases: Lydick against GIL; New omaha
Thomson-Houstun Electric Light company
against Dent, Sands against Gund; Ere
Dawson County National bank against Old
father; MCGOWAN against Notaw: Werner
against Lnsenmeyer; First National bank
Of PlattsmOuth against Gibson death OF
John n. Carter suggested): Moores against
Jones; Larson against Cox; Gumaer against
Day; Brockway against Humphrey leave
TO def ndant In error TO amend briefs); /;
kitzberger against Chicago. Rock Island &
Pacific Railroad company; Pratt against
against Rehlaender: Eckmann against
Turner Geave to plaintim in error to file
reply briefs instanterj; Hazen against WI
helmie; Brown against Campbell; Mann
against German Amer can Investment com
pany; Wilson against Lyons; Benedict
against T. l.. V. Land and Cattle company
Nebraska Loan and Trust company against
Haskell Nebraska Loan and Trust com
pany against Domon; Fidelity and Deposit
company, of Maryland against Parkinsol;
Brownfeid against Bleekman; Montpelier
Savings Bank and Trust company against
Follett; Falls city Stat bank against
Mthrie; Alherts against Dellavon; Gehrls
against Fuhrmann; Buchanan against
Saunders County National bank; Whiting
que Turbine and Roller Mills company;
Johansen against Modahl Rice against
Alien; Sever against Union Pacific Railroad
company; Gillespie against Stafford Fifar
against Burch; Postal against Martin Oeave
to plaintiff in error to file supplemental
briefs instanter); Albers against Kozeluk
Otto; Jahnke against state; Porter against
State; Logan county against Mckinley
Lanning Loan and Trust company.
The following miscellaneous orders were
made:
Yawter against Perkins. affirmed; Phila-
dal AfnrNu nd TfrfHef ~
against Mathieson. affirmed, mandate TO
issue In ten days; Wattles against Investors
seHirbty coI9ay Sica Boston Rac i
Pacific Railroad company, continued two
weeks; Omaha Bridge and Terminal Rail-
way company against Whitney continued
two weeks; Anderson against Drees con-
tinued until March 3; Rife against Riibe,
continued to March 3; Aultman. Miller &
Omaha Coal. Coke and Lime company;
Wilson against Lyon, submitted on motion
Dufrene against Anderson. leav, to modify
motion by interlineation, submitted on mo-
tion for order directing district court to
enter judgment on plaintins petition;
Evans Laundry. company against Crawford
submitted on motion to recall mandate;
= Lydlck against Gill motion to allow super
gedeas bond, fixing provisions submitted to
department with cause; Reno against State
submitted on motion to dismiss and TO
vacate supersedeas; New Omaha Thomson
Houston Electric Light company against
Dent leave to file additional transcript by
amending transcript on file by interlinea-
tion: Mann against German American In
vestment company. submitted on motion Of
appellant for leave to file briefs and to
continue First National bank of Columbus
against State eX rel O'Brien. submitted on
motion to advance Weddell against Omaha,
dismissed; Howell against McMangall, dis
missed: Abbott against Campbell, sub
mtted on motion to quash supersedcas and
TO dismiss proceedings in error Angel
against Omaha, dismissed mandate to .ssue
instanter Walsh against Walsh submitted
on motion to dismiss; Kirby against O'Con-
anll al1h hTlif cd on mi tn g 20 n
script and objections to jurisdiction and q
dismiss. leave given to each party to Ale
memora ndum briefs; Schlemme against
Omaha Gas Manufacturing company, plain
tiff to file and serve briefs within sixty
days, dismissed; Eaton against Eaton, leave
to appellee to file showing instanter, sub
mitted on application for leave to file fur
against Dun Grain company, leave to plain
/ tin. Johnson to file brief on motion within
/ three days II motion has not then been dis
posed Of submitted on motion to dismiss
State eX rel Gordon against Moores, ad-
vanced plaintiff to serve and file briefs ir
| forty days, defendant given forty days
! thereafter; Schricker against Schricker
appellants to file briefs upon motion fol
| rehearing within thirty days; Haslau
! against Barge. advanced. plaintiff in error
! to serve and file briefs in ten days, defend
( ant I'm error thirty days thereafter: First
| National bank OF Chadron against Hughes
leave to plaintiff In error to file briefs ir
! support of motion within thirty days from
! Dawes county against Furay. hearing oi
motion for writ of mandamus continued e
| March leave to plaintiff In error to filt
! brief on motion In ten days.