The Coeur d'Alene press. (Coeur d'Alene, Idaho) 1892-1907, 1905-12-09
EOOTENAI COUNTY CASES
SETTLED BY SUPREME COURT
csurt assws E.ssaisu. In Lambsr Com.
paay OpiaiaR Damage Case Of Bee
kis ". MsesRAGhy D~sidsa-Nss
TFai Dsnied.

teEmined, aud making light Of the
case If occasion offers an opening.
10 the opinion following the justice
grows facstiOus aud throws aside the
dignity Of the court toE the purpose
u entertaining the public.
In this case the judgment ran
against the Occur d'Alsns Lumber
company. = Washington corporation.
and the latter appeared a. appellant.
though the case Nns brought against
the other company, an Idaho corpora
tipn.
The 0pinIon reads:
This IL novel case u mistaken
dsntity novel because the bewii-
deFad refugee, two s0uIess corpora
tious Of direrse origin. in their digit
from decree Ia equity a. thing ub
hoFei BY eoTpoFatiousl became %
completely Loot In the labyrinth "a
nAmss that the plaiatiH aas besn
thence sysF aout % turn tbs restrain
ing clauses Of her decree up0n the
twain eth bat single name, 90 iu,
dtaarithinatsly that they arr dEivsu
hiihsF 10 tell thsiE story. Nos tbs
tbiRg sssms 10 have happened 10 this
say There exists ~ ths lake Occur
d'AleBs 10 tho county u koutsbAi.
q corporation born q tbs lass o.
tAs state u Idaho. aud named Tbs
'Cosar d'Aisus Lambsr eompany.
limited This corporation in the
yoaE 1908. not content alone with lts
oun. claimed and asserted that IL
Owned the laBds Of HaIds sheppard,
bat 70 pay hsed 20 such q ciaim che
ustty refused. 90 The contrary sbe
drss bsF bill and prosecuted AZ &c.
tiop 10 quiet hsr title Il happened
about this time there came into sx.
islsacs under the lass 81 che state
% Washington. another corporation
nsmsd The 'CoeuF d'Alsus LumbyF
company. The defendant failed 70
AnsWer The plaiatia's complain, and
proofs usFv tendaFpd sud findinss
aud dscFeea wpge made ubd entered.
By the fourth hndihs defendant Il
declared TO ~ = corporation duly
created. arTapised aud existing M.
der aBd by virtue Of toe Laws IL the
state Of wsshiagton Throughout
The aBdings aud decree the defendant
is named tho Occur d'AIons Lamber
company. While the action uas
commenced By the idaho corporation
this appeal ls taken By the Washing
Son corporation. This waahiutRnu
progeny Of statute lac charges that
Il should not b visited b. shs trans
RFeaaion of = stranger, That u hau
never bad lie lay In court aud that
IL has boen mistaken for the real De.
fandant. The idaho corporation seems
eoatent aud does not aupear 10 THU
court. Respondent, HuldA Sheppard,
has moved 10 dismiss the appeal OF
the grounds that notice thereof uai
not served on the real defendant, tbs
Idaho corporation. Respondent sp
pears anxious 90 see both % tbeH,
nameaakes unmaak and reveal theii
identity IN court. Appellant tell
us, however, that II came into exist
anoe under the persuasive influsne,
Of the Washington statutes and thai
II has no longing 60 respond TO an!
Idaho DEGREES. This reluctance IN
doubtsdiy comes from lie residence
10 Spokane where 30 many Of IL
kind exist with much ease and plea,
non residence ia Idaho courts With
ont an effort. At the argument coun
sci for respondent admitted that th,
Ending that defendant 10 a Washing
ton corporation was a mistake. Pos
hbiy there was an attraction abou
the Washington corporation. Occur
d'Alenv Lumber company from tn
fact that II was not limited Ap
pellant's brief and argument seem t.
have set respondent az ease on tba
score and her counsel has died Il mo
tlon TO have tina findings and judy
msnt so corrected n TO make the de
cree run against the limited oorpor
alton of Idaho, the real defendant
This we would not d5 II we shout,
sustain the motion to dismiss, whie
indeed We think was we'll taken
Since this latter motion has besl
made, however, we have concludes
that we might be able TO reach con
oluslon In the case satisfactory (
both sldes--a conclusion as nnusua
~ this case Is novel. We viii r.
mand this case with direction TO th
trial court to correct snd modify th
findings and judgment 30 that th