The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1906-02-12
SUPREME COURT
MEETS TODAY
February Setting of Cases Gov
ers Period of Nearly Two
Weeks.
RTY-THREE APPEAL
CASES SET FOR HEARING
In Addition, Mandate of Judge
MariOneauX VIII Come Up
for Hearing.

The Supreme court OF the State Will
meet today, the February term OF court
opening at that time. There are thirty
three appeal cases on the calendar, TWEEN
ty-flye being civil actions, four criminal
and four appeals from the probate di-
vision. In addition, the application for a
writ Of mandate by former Judge Marion
cauX To compel tho payment to him Of
500 alleged to be due FOR mileage while
he on the bench, Will be beard The
calendar ls as follows.
February 12,
State OF Utah respondent VS.. Albert
Mcbride. appellant.
State OF Utah. respondent, vs.. ]. w.
Freshwater, appellant
State OF Utah. respondent, VS.. l., p,
Winslow, Jr., appellant
February 13.
State of Utah respondent VS.. Willard
HutchlnSs, appellant.
Nolden-Judson Drug company, n corpo-
ration, ct al, appellant VS. Commercial
National Bank OF Ogden and r. 7 Hume,
administrator, respondent
s. o Nelson, respondent VS. Otto Pc
tersen and Ellen Petersen. intervenor and
appellant.
February ID.
w S. Tanner ct al. respondents. VS.
James Finlay ct al, and Levi A. ColYln
ct al, appellants
Benjamin Sanford, appellant. VS. Mark
Kunlcl ct al and Utah Lumber COM
pany. respondents.
Brigham city. respondent, VS.. George r.
Chase, appellant
February Is.
The John Alnsneld company, respondent.
VS. d. o Rasmussen. appellant
Edwin L, Woolley. respondent. VS. Ogden
Woolen Mills company, appellant
John Y, Rich. respondent. vs.. Utah
Commercial and Savings bank, a corpora
tlon. appellant.
February 16.
Daniel Hamer contestant, vs.. James A
Howell. contestcc.
G. 8 Holmes. respondent. VS.. Mary
Judge. appellant.
Joseph Obcndorfer, respondent vs.
George w. Meyer. appellant.
February 1e.
Richard Howe, appellant rs. Isaac
Sears, T. E. Jeremy ct al, respondents
Lee Richey, respondent, vs, Marion Beus.
appellant.
Joseph Baumgurten, appellant, vs.
James Chlpman ct al, respondents.
February 20.
J, II. Bailey ct al, as Bailey & Sons.
appellants. VS. Andrew Leishman and Da-
vid Leishman, respondents.
w H. Davis. respondent VS. Oregon
Short Line Railway company. appellant.
Edward d. Stone, respondent. VS. Ogden
II i'hillb 'pllpulgr tpptIlulll
February RI.
In the matter OF the estate Of Joseph
Lowham. deceased, a. j. Stone admins
traitor
In the matter OF the estate OF BENJAMIN
Franklin Eccles. deceased; A. J, Stone
In the matter of the estate of Albert
deceased, A. ]. Stone. admins
traitor.
February 23.
In the matter of the estate OF William
deceased; A. j Stone. admins
traitor.
c. ]. Grandln. respondent VS. Southern
Pacific company, appellant
The EccloS Lumber company. appellant
VS.. Ann II. Martin. exccutrix. respondent,
February 20.
c. ]. Larsen. respondent, vs.. j. c Gas
burg, appellant
Honerlne Mining and Milling company.
4 corporation. and Honorine Tunnel com
pany, appellants. vs.. Tallerday Steel Pipe
and Tank company and Utah Mining Ma
chinery and Supply company, respondents
In the matter OF tho estate OF William
Margaret Williams. appellants, vs. {. W.
Johnson, respondent
February 27.
j NJ. Lockhart, administrator of the es.
ate of j. G. Rhodin. deceased, appellant
rs. James Farrell. respondent
Matilda Johanson. respondent, VS. grand
odgc A. o. U w. OF Utah. Wyoming and
IDAHO appellant.
Oregon Short Line Railway company.
plaintiff. vs. Third District court, in and
'or Salt Lake county. defendant
In the matter OF the application Of
Thomas MarioneauX. for writ of man
late against State Board of Examiners