Los Angeles herald., 1910-10-15

Mr.. Blue testified in the trial of the
case that he did not know at the time
he demanded the transfer of the stock
who he was trustee for, and that he
did not know on the witness stand on
the trial of the case for whom he was
trustee.
1.-THE second reason was that the par
ties who claimed to own the stock had
filed notice with the All Night and
Day bank that they were owners OF
the stock and that they would hold the
bank responsible If 1t transferred the
stock, hence the suit of Blue VS.. the
All Night and Day bank. The attor-
neys for the plaintiff demanded that
If the case of the All Night and Day
bank be appealed from the verdict Of
the superior court, large bond be CIV
en-, 100000 in amount.
SUPREME COURT RULES
'"The All Night and Day bank depos-
tied the stock with the clerk of the
court, as it deemed 1t had the right to
under article 943, Code of Civil Pro-
cedure, which 1t believed perfected
from the appeal by giving the regu-
lar cost bond to the superior court in
the amount of $780, The plaintiff asked
the superior court for an order to COM
pei the All Night and Day bank to
transfer its stock on the books and the
clerk of the court to turn it over to
Hugh Blue, trustee. While this was
being done, an application was made
to the supreme court and the supreme
court In San Francisco made the fol-
lowing order:
1t is ordered that the Hon. N. p.
Conrey, Judge of the superior court
of Los Angeles county, and the said
Hugh Blue, show cause before the
supreme court en- banc, at San
Francisco, on Monday, September
5, 1910, at ten o'clock, a. M, why
an order should not be made as in
said petition prayed And it is fur
ther ordered that in the meantime
and pending the decision of this
court, herein, all proceedings upon
the Judgment in said cause of
Hugh Blue VS.. the All Night and
Day bank ct al. be stayed. Or
dered further that copy of said
petition be served upon said Blue,
together with this order.
BEATTY, G. j.
"The case was submitted to the
supreme court on September 6. After
submission and on the goth day or
September, 1910, the court made its
decision as follows:
REFUSES RECEIVER
BY the court.
1t is ordered that the petition of
the All Night and Day bank and
Newton ]. Skinner, president, ana
w. j. Conner, secretary, of the All
Night and Day bank, for the ap-
pointment of an officer, as receiver,
with whom the shares of stock
mentioned in the petition herein
may be assigned be and the same
is hereby denied and that the pc
tition of the said parties for a SUI
persedeas and restraining order be
granted to the following extent
only:
days from this day, said All Night
and Day bank, and Newton j.
Skinner, president, and w. j. Con-
ner, secretary, issue to the Title
, Insurance and Trust company as
receiver eleven hundred fifty-f1Ve
shares Of the capital stock of the
All Night and Day bank, being the
3 same stock mentioned In their petit
tion, and that the said receiver hold
and vote and otherwise fully rep
resent said stock, subject always to
the orders and control of the SUI
perior court Of the county of Los
Angeles, pending the appeal In
said action of Hugh Blue, trustee,
vs. the All Night and Day bank,
ct al, and that in all other respects
execution of the judgment be
stayed pending appeal.
''It will be seen that the contention
of the All Night and day bank that it
not be required to give bond was sus-
tanned, but that the court ordered
the stock to be turned over to the re-
ceiver, which was just what had been
asked for, but the proviso was added
that the receiver be allowed to vote
the stock under the order of the supe-
rior court OF the county Of Los An
geles. .
From this part of the decision the
All Night and Day bank was advised
through its attorneys that there should
be a rehearing before the supreme
court. On October 10 petition for
reeharing was filed, there being thirty
DAYS from that time that the decision
was rendered, September 10. for the
granting Of q rehearing. This petit
tion of rehearing is now before the
supreme court, and the banks attor-
neys. Gavin McNab and r. p Hem
shall of San Francisco, ana Messrs.
Morton, Riddle and Hollzer Of Los
Angeles, have advised that the stock
holders or any one participating in
executing any part of the Judgment
win be in contempt Of the supreme
oOttvf . oaxy4I,fvo. fe, dOna hafOra OCt0-