Omaha daily bee. (Omaha [Neb.]) 187?-1922, 1906-02-10

1863 Smith against Curtice. Error from
Gosper. On rehearing former judgment OF
this court adhered to. Oldham, c. Division
l. Action of the trial court in giving and
refusing instructions examined and held
q Action of the trial court in admitting
evidence examined and held not preJu-
dic!al
1910 State against Cannot Original. De-
murrer to answer sustained; judgment for
plaintiff. Per curriam.
] State of Nebraska against Stephen w.
Tanner, Neb.. 1O2 n. w. 2S5, approved and
iS71I.~state against Luedke. Original. De-
\ murrer to answer sustained; judgment for
| plaintiff. Per Curiam.
State of Nebraska against Stephen w.
Tanner, Neb lO2 n. W., 2S5, approved and
1912 In re- application of Jorgensen Err
ror from Douglas. Affirmed HolcQmb,
! l. The Board of Fire and Police Commits
| sioners of a city of the metropolitan class
| may, for good reason, in the exercise of a
sound discretion, refuse to grant license
! to sell malt, spirituous and vinous liquors,
| even though no protest or objection by 9TH
ers be interposed against the granting OF
| the license applied for.
! .. An applicant had complied with all the
| requirements of the statute and ordinances
relating to the subject and no protest or
| remonstrance had been made against the
granting of his application, but the BOARD
! OF Fire and Police Commissioners refused
| to grant-it for reasons expressed IN q resoiu
| ton spread upon the record follows:
Resolved. That the application Of 4.
! Jorgensen for license at No. ~ North
/ Tenth street Omaha. be and the same
| hereby is denied and refused, for the rea-
/ son that there are now four or hVe saloons
In operation within IN b,i P1GE OF s Teo s
| that no new or additional saloons De al
! lowed at said place Applications for ga
/ loon licenses at said place have twice been
refused to different parties in the last two
| years for the same reason.
Upon appeal to the district court INC de-
7 - I,raT a uTnG a
/ frmed. Held upon the record as presented
| that no error was committed by the ruling
1S7s3 Samueison against Mickey. Appeal
| from Polk. Motion for rehearing overruled.
Cause remanded with directions to dismiss
Where a tract Of land has been conveyed
/ by a deed absolute In form 10 satisfy ana
| pay the mortgage liens existing thereon, a
| subsequent parol promise TO reconVey II 10
| the grantor, without any consideration 10
| support t. will not sustain an acuon 10 de-
| clare the deed a mortgage and redeem from
! the liens which have been cancelled and
1855 Colgrove against Pickett Error
| from Gage. Reversed and renamed Dur
| he, c. Division No. p
4 party has a right to have his theory Of
! the case submitted to the jury when there
! IS competent evidence to support it,
, 1873. State eX rel. McMonics against Nc
Monies. Error from Burt. Affirmed. Dur
~. The charter Of Villages confers on the
trustees OF the village power 10 regulate
billiard and pool halls, but not TO suppress
them Authority to regulate does not give
power 10 suppress.
. An ordinance of the village OF Lyons
REQUIRED the proprietors Of pool and billiard
halls 10 pay an annual occuDatiOn tax which
was to be paid on the second Tuesday OF
May or as soon thereafter as they became
liable TO the tax by engaging in the bust
| ness. The relator. on the first Tuesday In
May, rendered 10 the village treasurer the
tax. required on five tables which the treas
urer refused to accept. and thereupon re-
lator Immediately brought this action TO
| compel him TO take and receipt for the
money. Held, that the tax not being due or
payable until the second Tuesday in May
the action was prematurely commenced and
the writ properly denied
| l399e Courthouse Rock Irrigation Com
pany against Willard. Appeal from Chey-
enne Affirmed. Letton, c, Division No. 1.
| /. Where the evidence shows that an APP
propriator of water does not benefcially
| use the amount which il has diverted into
It's canal by reason OF wastage and seepage
| caused By defective maintenance, and there
| is enough water In the stream, IL cconom-
| ically used 70 supply both the complainant
| and certain riparia owners taking water
| for irrigation purposes above the point OF
| diversion, the appropriation is not entitled
| TO an Injunction to prevent the use OF the
| water bv such owners.
| 1905 Turner against Grimes Error from