The Twin Falls times. [volume] (Twin Falls, Idaho) 1905-1916, 1913-10-28
KING HILL CASE WITH COURT
Attorneys Reach Agreement Under
Which Case Will Not Affect Settlers.

Attorneys Reach Agreement Under
Which Case Will Not Affect Settlers.
Only the submission of briefs now
remains to place before the United
States district court all the issues in
the complicated King Hill case. The
hearing of evidence and Arguments on
the merits of the case was begun and
completed Thursday, and the briefs
are to be submitted within 10 days
Several legal problems of consider
able Importance are to be decided by
Judge Dietrich when he passes on the
issues involved. Chief among them is
the question whether the holder of a
mechanics lien which had previously
been foreclosed against the owner has
the right to appear in foreclosure ac-
ton and foreclose such lien against
the mortgage or against other claim
ants who were not parties to the ac-
ton when the lien was originally fore
closed, where such action has not been
commenced within six months after
the claim of lien was filed.
In settling that question the court
will determine the rights of the Con-
tinental e Commercial Savings &
Trust company, which has brought
the foreclosure proceedings, and the
Pacific Coast Pipe company, con-
Germ which has interviewed in the suit
with mechanics lien.
Admissions and stipulations have
practically adjusted the claims of
most of the many litigants originally
involved in the action with the excep-
ton of the two mentioned above, and
the Minneapolis Steel & Machinery
company, which claims lien on a
bridge built over Snake river on the
King Hill project.
The rights of the Craster Orchard
company and of the state were deter
mined Tuesday by the stipulation en-
tered in the record. The Craster Or
chard company interviewed in the suit
to protect paidup water rights it
holds in the project. The state also
interviewed in behalf Of certain of the
water users. Under the stipulation
entered on the record, the rights of
the water users will remain unim-
paired, no matter what may be the de-
cision in the case.
The rights of the King Hill Extern
sion company were adjusted in sim
liar manner. The Extension company
was named as defendant in the pres
ent foreclosure action, but an under
standing was reached whereby it will
not be affected. The claim of the
Minneapolis Steel & Machinery COM
pany is yet to be passed upon. The
court must decide whether or not the
bridge was included in the property
listed as subject to the mortgage held
by the Continental company. On that
Y,t hn inn Of %l,a nj
der which the mortgage is given is I'M
certain. The bridge was built subse-
quent to the filing of the mortgage.
The Minneapolis company claims
that the bridge is not subject to that
mortgage and that it has right to
foreclose. The bridge is of impor-
tance to the project, in that the King
Hill pipe line is carried across Snake
river on it. Attorneys for the CONT
mental company and for the Pacific
Coast Pipe company are setting up
the claim that an easement has been
acquired over the bridge for the pipe
line. This claim is being combatted
by the Minneapolis concern 1t seeks
to foreclose it's lien and wipe out the
alleged right of way for the pipe line.
1t would then be in position to COM
pei the operators Of the project to
pay for the bridge.
Foreclosure iww naturally follow if
the attack made on the standing in
court of the Pacific Coast Pipe COM
pany is successful. The King Hill
project is now in the hands of a re-
ceiver. The Continental company,
holding mortgage on the King Hill
bonds, filed suit to foreclose. The
Pacific Coast Pipe company inter-
vened in an effort to establish the
priority of a mechanics lien it holds
against the project. The company had
already obtained foreclosure against
the King Hill Irrigation & Power
company. The Continental company
attacks the standing in court in the
present case of the Pacific Coast con-
Germ on statutory grounds. The prior
ity of this and several other liens re-
mains to be passed on by the court
and through them the legal complica-
tons arise. The issues are now be-
fore the court, and when they are de-
cided the future ownership of the pro-
ject will be established-Sta
When the apartment, which might,