Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1906-09-14
DURAND AGAIN
MADE DEFENDANT
Another Complaint Which Alleges
Conspiracy is
Filed.
WANT JUDGMENT SET ASIDE.
Case Involves action Of the Luke Col
lection Agency and a Restraining
order i Asked For nv plaintiffs.

Another complaint showing up the
methods of the Luke collection agency
ana It's Justice court az Mnuay pre-
sided over by Charles +. Durand, was
Gled In the district court yesterday
afternoon in which 1t il alleged that
there was a conspiracy between inc
defendants 10 cheat and detraud plain
has out Of money August valentine
aud wife are the plaintiffs and DINA
Wathon, Francis G Luke. J. 2. Me-
omie. former justice Of the peace al
Murray. c. +. Durand. the present JUS
ticc and the Merchants Protective as
sociation are the defendants. plaintiffs
ask that a certain judgment rendered
against them By McOmle be declared
nun aud void. and that the DEFEND
ants De restrained from Issuing an
execution IN the case or from taklus
any further action whatever IN con-
nection with The case.
II is alleged that Luke Med an ac-
ton in McOmies court in behalf OF
Otina Wathen 10 recover certain sheep
alleged TO have been leased 20 Valen-
tine and wife. The latter demlrred
TO the complaint and objected - me
Urisdiction OF the court on the ground
that neither ~ tho parties TO me ae-
ton were residents of Murray ana me
sheep IN question we're located IN BOB
elder county and had never been ~
This county McOmio oYerrulcd INC
demurrer and objection 10 his jnfls-
dlciion and the ease finally went u
trial on oct. Z 1898.
At the conclusion ~ the evidence
Justice McOmie announced that IN his
Judgment there was 10 cause OF action
against defendants but nc was inter-
ruptcd by Luke who suggested lhai
he take the matter under adylsemenL
Mcomlc accordingly took The case un-
der adyisement and on oct 3 notified
the attorneys for the Nalentlnes that
he had rendered Judgment against
them for the recovery Of i5 head OK
sheep or their value assessed at s22o-
on Nov. s the Valentines filed notice
OF appeal and on Nov. n the attorney
Cor plalntlff received n9lice OF OBJ
iectlons 10 the sureties on the appeal
bond. On the same date new and adj
ditionai sureties were secured but II ~
alleged that McOmie refused TO APP
prove the bond ON the ground that II
had not been iiled IN time and in order
10 make Il appear that the bond had
rot been filed within the statutory time
II Is alleged that McOmle antedated the
Judgment 50 that his records would
show that Il was rendered on oct IN
stead OF Oct. 10.
An order was obtained from the dis
irict court directing McOmie 10 trans
nit the papers on appeal 90 the district
court. The attorney for Luke and Nc
0mie then moved that the appeal be
Dismissed but the motion Was denied.
in some manner Luke induced Duand.
who IN McOmie's successor. 70 enter M
judgment against the Valentines and
the surctics on their appeal bond and
Threatened 10 have an execution issued
TO collect about 5000 from the plaintiffs
herein and their sureties.
Judgment IA therefore asked that the
said Judgment be set aside and that
the defendants be restrained from is
suing an execution OF taking any fur
Their action Ia the case. a temporary
restraining order has been issued from
The district court.