Santa Fe new Mexican. [volume] (Santa Fe, N.M.) 1898-1951, 1911-02-01
THOUGHT He
WAS LIBELED
DIR. Marvin E. Woodling of
Las Vegas Loses Out in
Supreme Court
OPINIONS HANDED DOWN
Lower Court Affirmed in Find.
ing Pettine Guilty of
sMurder.

The supreme court was in session
again today these being present:
Chief Justice Pope Associate JUS
tees McFie, Parker, Abbott, Mechem,
Wright, Roberts, United States Attor-
ney David J, Leahy, Attorney General
Frank W. CLANCY and Deputy Marshal
l. L. Chayes; Supreme Court Clerk
Jose D. Sena.
The court disposed Of the following:
Case No. 1889. Marvin f. Wood
ling, plaintiff in error. Us. Secundino
Romero and Enrique II. Salazar, de-
PENDANTS in error; error to district
court San Miguel county. Writ Of er.
ror dismissed. The opinion is by
Chief Justice Pope and is concurred
in by all the associate justices. The
action was for libel and $4,000 in dam.
ages was asked by DR.. Woodward for
an alleged libel printed in El Inde.
pendiente at Las Vegas. Woodward
,
l. In an action for libel the amount
of damage alleged and claimed in the
complaint fixes the value of the prop
erty in dispute" for the purposes Of
the laws of 1907 Chapter 81, Section
"a, which requires the record to be
printed where the amount in dispute
exceeds one thousand dollars.
2. Under rule 5, of this court, sec
ton 2, requiring the filing of the print
ed record on or before the return day.
the absence of such printed record
on the call of the case for argument
will unless good cause be shown for
the omission, result in the dismissal
of the writ of error.
Case No 1341. J. H. Kingston and
". D. Mahoney, appellees, VS.. J. W.
Walters, appellant. Judgment is af-
tirmed. The opinion is by Associate
Justice Abbott and is conCurred in by
all Of the associate justices with the
exception of Judge Mechem who
tried the case and as Chief Justice
Pope presided at the first trial he
did not participate either.
The case was an appeal from the
district court of Chaves county. The
syllabus says:
l. The time of performance of
written contract within the statute
of frauds may be enlarged by sub
sequent oral agreement.
?. If one who is entitled to a pay
ment within time fixed by a written
agreement between himself and others
for the sale of real estate, assures
those who are to make the payment,
before it becomes due, that they can
have longer time within which to
make it than that stipulated in the
agreement, and they, relying on that
assurance, fail to make the payment
within such stipulated time, the payee
is estopped from claiming a breach
OF the agreement because of such
failure.
Case No. 1870. First National Bank
OF Artesia appellee, VS.. The Home
insurance Company of New York. an.
pellant. Appeal from district court
Of Eddy county. Judgment affirmed.
The opinion is by Associate Justice
Mechem, all of the associate justices
concurring therein. Chief Justice
Pope having tried the case did not
participate
The syllabus says.
l. In an action brought to recover
on draft the complaint alleged that
the draft was drawn by an agent of
MS principal by authority of the
principal; that the draft was present.
ed, payment refused and that same
Is still unpaid, held to be good on a
demurrer for failure to state facts
sufficient to constitute a cause of ac-
ton, for the reason that "a draft
drawn by an agent on his principal
by authority of the principal, is equiv
alent to a draft drawn by the prin-
cipal himself and not accepted by the
draWee in order to bind it.
2. BY the provisions of Section 120.
Chapter SO, of the laws of 1907.
known as Negotiable Instruments Act
1t is provided that where the drawer
and drawee are the same person
that draft may be treated as a
promissory note. thus requiring no ac.
ceptance
), BY the provisions of Section 12
of Chapter 62, of the Laws of 1901
every contract in writing imports con.
sideration.
Pettine Sc,
Case No. 1906. The Territory of
New Mexico VS.. Antimo Pettine ap-
pellant, appeal from the district court
of Bernalillo county. Judgment af-
firmed. The opinion is written by
Associate Justice Wright and is con-
Cured in by Chief Justice Pope and
all of the associate justices except
Justice Abbott who having tried the
case below, did not participate.
Pettine was indicted for the crime
of murder by the grand jury of Ber-
nalillo county, the indictment alleg-
ing in the usual form that on Febru-
tary 4, 1907, he killed and murdered
I Benedito. Berardinelli. To this In
dictment the defendant plead mot
! guilty" and was tried before jury
in November 1908. The jury returned
a verdict finding the defendant gull
/