Arizona republican., 1905-05-16
THE DISTRICT COURT
Judgment for Plaintiff in Aauk vs.
 Evans-0theT Cases.

1 , jury from the venire of forty-five was begun in district court yesterday
 morning it was found that there were several reasons why some of the mem bers of the venire need not serve. One l member was a member of the fish and game commission; three were sick; one was deaf and one was a mem Der 1 of the Tempe fire department. Still another had a sick family. One mem Der of the venire for some reason fail ed to appear.
 The most important matter before the court was the case of George A. Mauk against William Evans This had been appealed from a court of justice of the peace in which the plaintiff had been given judgment.
 The plaintiff is an agent of the New York Life Insurance company and he claimed that he had insured the de- fendant, in 1903 for S3.OOO, the yearly premium being S154.53. The plaintiff said that the defendant told him that he could not immediately pay the pre- mium but would do so shortly. When the time came when there must be an accounting to the company the plaintiff said that he paid the premium himself relying upon the defendant to make him safe, He alleged that the defend ant not only did not do that but when the next premium fell due he allowed his insurance to lapse.
 The defendant on the other hand denied that he had his life insured at all. He said that there had been some talk with the plaintiff on the subject but there had been no consummation of the transaction and that no policy had ever been delivered to him. The judgment carries with it the amount sued for with costs and interest It is said that the case will be further ap- pealed to the supreme court.
 In the damage suit of Clara s. San ders administratrix of the estate of c. w. Sanders against the Phoenix Street Railway company to recover for injuries sustained by Sanders in faI- ling from one of the companys cars. the trial order was vacated and the case by consent was continued for the term.
 In the suit of pr. Win Wylie against Thomas D. Bennett, on the motion of Col Jerry Millay, attorney for the plaintiff, F. w. Lewis, was entered as counsel
 In the case of John G. Harden against Prosper P. Parker, by stipuIa- tion the Arizona Copper Mountain Mining company was made party de- fendant. A motion by the plaintiff to this effect was denied by the court on the last law day.
 In the divorce suit of Joe Roderick against Jesusa Roderick, Attorney A. Buck for the defendant announced his from the case.
 Late in the afternoon the case of Carol C. Hedger against w. T. Smith 1 and others was taken up. This suit had been originally begun by the late Colonel Hedger. Notice of his death | having been given to the court last Sat 1 urday his son was substituted as plain ! tiff The suit grows out of the partial | sale of the Lemon hotel property to ! the plaintiff. The purchase price | agreed upon was S13,OOO. It is alleged 1 that the plaintiff paid S1, 900 the remain | Ing S12,00O to be paid shortly there | after or the defendant to be secured | by a mortgage on the property. It is | alleged that the defendant failed to ! give possession as they had agreed and | that they had otherwise failed to full | in the terms of the contract The | complaint states that plaintiff re- wing upon the contract put additional | insurance on the property at a cost of i about $29.
 A funny thing is mentioned in the complaint though it was agreed by the attorneys on both sides that it could nave no bearing. In the agreement here was description of the proper y but the property actually described consisted of vacant lots lying on Wash ngton street two blocks east of the Lemon hotel property.