Albuquerque morning journal. [volume] (Albuquerque, N.M.) 1903-1926, 1910-08-17
FIVE OPINIONS ARE
HANDED DOWN BY
SUPREME COURT
Cases Have Az
ready Been Disposed Of Thus
Far During Session, EStab-
fishing a Record,
ispeolnl cerre.ponaenes q MornInE J@ournaIl

fSneefai Correspondence 10 Morning Journnii
Santa Fe, n. NJ. Aug l6--FlVe
more opinions were handed down py
the territorial supreme court To-Day
and il is understood that five more
are prepared and will be
shortly, making altogether z. oplh-
ions thus far for the term, with Two
more weeks for the court to SIT. rms
Is establishing a new c Tor nara
work and speedy disposal of business
I before it. This forenoon the case OF
| the Territory of New Mexico, appell-
liant. VS.. The Eastern Railway of New
Mexico. involving the abandonment or
Texico as the terminal OF h Belen
cutoff was argued and submitted, ana
two cases are set this afternoon
The five opinions handed down TINS
forenoon were as follows:
In the case Of Aaron Gray, appel
lee. VS.. New Mexico Pumice Stone Co..
ct al. No. 1916, from Valencia county
| the Judgment of the lower u IS al
firmed In an opinion written by AS
| sociate Justice Frank w, Parker II
case Is an action 70 foreclose a me-
chanic's lien upon Section 10, TOWN
shin II NJ, Range IL West in Valencia
| county. The decree Of foreclosure
was awarded and declared the lien OF
appellee prior to the mortgage OF de-
PENDANTS. of whom NJ. w. F~1ournoy,
the onlv appellant. was one. Appel
liant. with some Of his co-defendants'
interposed a demurrer TO the COM
plant on the ground that II did not
state facts sufficient to constitute a
cause OF action, which demurrer was
overruled.
In the case of John King, appellant.
VS.. Levi Taber. appellee, No 1858,
| from Union county, the judgment Is
affirmed on remittitur Of S144.26. APP
pelIee, the plaintiff below, sued to re-
/ cover balance due on a contract 10
cut and stack hay. claiming to have
cut and stacked S72 tons at an agreed
price of So per ton. He admitted pay
ments to the amount of S397.95. De-
PENDANT denied that more thai 2s2.6s
tons we're cut and stacked. lie FUR
Their claimed a payment Of Sfl.5O up
on an order. The costs Of the appeal
are equally divided. The syllabus
says:
/. The court is under no obligation
I'm a civil case to instruct the Jury IN
less requested so to do; ana, hence the
fact that an instruction is insufficient
IS not available error unless a suill-
ctent instruction was requested.
.. In the absence OF any speclilc
agreement for the measurement oil
hay i'm stacks. the rule OF measurement
laid down in chapter "a OF the ses-
sion laws of 1901, entitled An ACT 70
establish a legal method OF measuiihs
hay" will control. ,
4 Under tho general assignment OF
error that the verdict of the jury anu
the Judgment thereon are contrary 70
the evidence in the case, the Only
question that can be considered by
the court is whether there Is any SUI
stantiaI evidence to support Yer
dict-Candelaria y. Miera, ~ y. NJ
$50 ,,
wrote the opinion.
In case No. 1905. Chicago, Rock ISL
and and Ei Paso Railway Company
appellant. rs. Jacob Wcrtheim, appei-
lee. from Quay county, is attirme9'
The appellee Wertheim sued the ran
road for $500 damages Tor
hav and grass burned from being set
on fire from sparks OF an engine'
Wertehlm was given S1e0 damages
and the company appealed. h opin-
ion is bv Chief Justice W. II. Pope and
the syllabus is as follows;
l.. Denial upon Information ana be
lief OF matters necessarily Wlthlh the
knowledge of the pleader is not per-
MISSILE.
.. In a suit against a railroad com
Dany a denial by such company upon
information and belief that II was OPP
Grating a railroad at nc time and place
alleged being a matter necessarily
within defendants ki,-wfedge. raises
no such issue upon the pleadings as
will admit testimony that IT was not
operating such q railroad over an ob-
lection that such testimony was not
admissible under the ~pleadings-
In case No. 1901, Emmett Writ
Eugeuio Gomez n FleiN Garcia, q
co-portnership doing business under
the firm name and style OF Writ Co
mez and ccmapny. appellants, vs.,
George W Kutz a Co. apellees. from
Rio Arriha county, the ease Is affirm
cd upon filing of "A remitittur og $50,
In an opinion by Associate Justice NJ
q. Mcchem. II was an action for re-
pIcvin OF sheep. The court below
awarded damages In double the
amount Of the value Of wool aiken by
the plaintiffs from the sheep repleNin-
ed during their detention. h amount
taken having been 52O pounds AZ ~
cents a pound. The syllabus follows
/. This court will not on appeal dis
any substantial eVidence-Candel-
ari 81. Micra. Is y. n. Ssh
q IN this case the jury gave as
Incident 10 the recovery by defendant
Of certain sheen damages in double
the amount OF the value Of the wool
taken from the sheep repievined dur
ing their detention. WOOL 51H pounds
10 cents per pound. held that such
damages are not recoverable under
subsection e5e. chapter te7. laws OF
lee7. which allows double damages
for d use OF the property from the
time % delivery.
8 Error alleged in variance be-