Santa Fe new Mexican. [volume] (Santa Fe, N.M.) 1898-1951, 1910-01-06
SUPREME COURT
ADJOURNS
VIII Meet Again on February
28 to Hand Down
Opinions
ONE CASE REVERSED TODAY
Another is Affirmed---Many Ap-
plicants Admitted to
the Bar.

The Territorial supreme court met
yesterday afternoon with Chief JUS
tice William J. Mills presiding. and
Associate Justices McFie, Pope, Abb
! bott, Mechem and Abbott on the
bench, Judge A. w. Cooley being alb
sent on account of illness. U. S. Dis
trict Attorney David J. Leahy, Deputy
L, S. Marshal Smith, Attorney Gener-
al Franw w. Clancy and Supreme
Court Clerk Jose d. Sena were pres
ent.
This forenoon the court handed
down two opinions. Case No. 1858
, was reversed in an opinion written by
Chief Justice Mills. 1t was the case
of James Reagan, appellee, VS.. The
E! Paso and Northeastern Railway
Company and the El Paso and North
western Railroad Company. appel
lants, appeal from the district
court for Otero county. John w.
Thompson was attorney for appel
| lees and w. A. Hawkins and Frank
! ling for the appellants. The district
court has awarded plaintiff damages
in the sum of $500 for the killing of
a mare and injury to jack by a
train. The opinion of the supreme
court holds that the record does not
disclose that the jack was injured and
the mare killed by the defendant COM
paines or either of them. There is
also total lack of proof that the in
jury was due to any negligence OF
the defendant. Negligence may not
| be inferred from the mere fact that
stock have been killed or injured by a
railroad train. Negligence must be
alleged and proved
Adjournment Taken.
After this afternoons session which
convened at three o'clock and during
! which number of opinions were
handed down. adjournment was TAX
en- to February 2S. The adjournment
Ct the supreme court to February 29,
was due to several causes. The ill
ness of Judge Cooley, the early re-
tirement of Chief Justice Mills to be-
come governor and the fact that the
matter of the reappointment of
Judge McFie and Parker is still pend
ing, seemed to make it desirable
that further oral hearings should be
delayed until the complete personnel
of the bench has been definitely an
nounced. The court made an order
that any cases now pending may be
submitted in briefs upon stipulation
between counsel. 1t is expected
that most of the cases now under ad-
visement will be decided at the Feb
ruary session and that summer ses-
sion held probably in July will prac-
tically dispose of the calendar as it
exists up to that time.
! Other Business Disposed Of.
| Case Moo. 1858 was affirmed in an
opinion by Associate Justice W. H.
Pope. 1t is the case of William D.
Radcliffe, appellee, VS.. Jose E. Cha
YES, appellant, administrator, an ap-
peal from Valencia county. Frank w.
! Clancy appeared for appellant and
Felix H. Lester for appellee. Dr.
Radcliffe had claimed $1,410 for pro-
fessional services. The probate court
had allowed him $472 and the district
court $1,047.35. From this the ad-
ministrator appealed. Judge Pope in
his syllabus says:
l. Failure of the trial court to
make special findings as provided by
Compiled Laws, section 2999 is not
a tenable assignment of error where
no request for such finding was made
and denied in the court below. Bank
V. Baird, Is N. NJ 431, followed.
2. A motion to strike out the whole
answer of a witness, where part of
| the answer is good, is properly denied.
3. In cases tried before the court
it will be presumed that the court
ultimately disregarded inadmissible
testimony and the erroneous admis-
sion of testimony will afford no ground
of error unless it is apparent that the
court considered such testimony in
deciding the case.
T. Under G. L., Sec. 3031, requiring
as prerequisite to receiving books
of account, proof by customers that
the party usually kept correct books,
it is sufficient if it be shown by Gus
toners that during period of years
they had always found their accounts
as rendered correct, coupled with tes-
timony that such accounts were taken
from the books in question, it not be-
inc essential that such customers
shall have actually examined such
be ks and compared their accounts
/ sh them.
Under C. L., sec. 3031, admitting
geoks of account where the party
jept no clerk, the fact that a physi.