Santa Fe new Mexican. [volume] (Santa Fe, N.M.) 1898-1951, 1911-01-05
BIG CASE N
SUPREME COURT
Judges Listen to Arguments
in Important Railroad
Controversy
REHEARIN6 HAS BEEN DENIED
In Sacramento Valley Company
and Other Appeals Be-
fore Tribunal.
In The supreme court yesterday:


merce, appellee, vs.. Jaspar \. Broy-
! les ct al, appellants, appeal from dis
trict court, SOcorro county, a motion
for rehearing was argued and submit
! ted
Case No 1854. In the matter Of
the last will and testament of Sarah
Ellen Dye, deceased. Isaiah Dye, exc
| cutOr, APPELLEE. VS. Ora Butler Maice,
appellant, appeal from district court,
| The court overruled the motion for
miss the appeal wa argued and sub
! mitted
Cas- No. 1861 Puritan Manufac-
! turing company, appellee, vs.. Toti &
! Gradi, appellant, appeal, from district
court, B rnalillo county, the motion
to dismiss appeal was argued and
submitted.
The court then adjourned until 10
o'clock this morning. Chief Justice
Pope and all OF the associate Justices
were present when court convened.
The court oyerrul d the motion for
a rehearing in all Of the following
five cases:
No. 1924. Michael O'NeilI, appel
liant VS.. Fred J. Otero, special master.
appellee, appeal from district court.
Santa Fe county.
No. 1856. The Sacramento Valley
Irrigation Co., plaintiff in error vs..
| Oliver NJ. Lee, defendants in error:
error to district court, Otero county.
This case involves important water
rights in the Sacramento Mountains
in Otero county.
Case No 1850, Eagle Mining and
Improvement Co, plaintiff in error
VS.. R. f. Lund, defendant in error;
error to district court, Chaves
! county.
Case No. 1863. Territory of New
Mexico, appellee VS.. Carlos Cecil Aver,
appellant, appeal from district court,
Bernalillo county.
Case No. 1867. p. II. Coesling ct
al appelloes VS.. Gross Kelley & Co
| appellant, appeal from district court
Bernalillo county.
Mining Company Loses.
Case No. 1877. Eagle Mining and
| Improvement Company VS.. Mary R.
Hamilton ct al, a mandate from the
i United States supreme court affirm
| ing the judgment of the supreme
court Of New Mexico was filed and
| judgment entered against the Eagle
Mining company for $12,5O0 and
costs
Case No. 1858. Territory of New
Mexico. appellee vs. Malcon Trapp, ap-
pellant, appeal from district court,
Lincoln county. Submitted on
briefs; the appellant gets 60 days
and the appellee 30 days thereafter
| to file briefs.
Case No. 1887. The Arizona and
| Colorado Railroad Company of New
Mexico appellee. VS.. the Denver and
Rio Grande Railroad Company, appel
iant. appeal from district court, San
juan county. Argued and submitted.
This case is an Interesting one
and it occupied the attention Of the
court all day. The brief and argu-
ment Of the appellee gives the fol-
lowing statement of the case:
The action was Drought by the
plaintiff to restrain and enjoin the
defendant from interfering with, de
stroying, occupying, encroach1ng on,
or crossing with its road the right
of-way of plaintiffs located road in
the manner indicated in the COM
plant at eight different points Of
crossing and two points of encroach-
ment in San Juan county. New Mex
leo An injunction was granted May
murrer to the complaint by defend
ant being sustained. and the COM
plaint dismissed. was necessarily ter
minated From the Judgment Of the
court sustaining said demurrer an ap-
! neal was taken to this court and the
Judgment reversed and the cause re-
instated and the Injunction renewed
with leave to defendant to give an in
Identifying bond and have the in
junction stayed with leave to defend
ant to proceed with the construction
Of its road, which defendant proceed
ed to do. The defendant then an
swered the complaint to which plain
tiff replied. and the cause was re-
ferred to a referee to take proofs.
The cause was later argued before
the court, its venue having been
changed to Bernalillo county, and
both parties asked for specific find
ings of facts and conclusions OF law.
After the finding Of facts and con-
clusions of law the court entered
decree in said cause which did not
require the immediate surrender by
| the defendant of it's constructed
road,
It required that it vacate and sur
render to plaintiff the possession
| thereof when the said plaintiff shall
have constructed of least twenty