Bisbee daily review., 1917-06-27
SUPREME COURT HANDS DOWN NUMBER OF
 NEW DECISIONS
Upholds State Law That Em- ployes Must Be Paid On Day of Discharge. Several Cochise County C as e s Among Number.

Several opinions were handed down by the supreme court yesterday, none of them of great importance, though one of them is not without interest. It is the Arizona Power company, ap- pellant against the state. from Haya' pal county. It was instituted by T. k. Caughlin against the power company whose service he had quit and had been required by the company to wait until the regular pay day. before re- ceiving the amount due him. The company was charged with violation of the law which provides that an em- ploye shall be paid when he quits the service of his employer.
 The case was tried before Judge Smith of Yavapai county without a jury and a verdict and judgment were rendered against the defendant con- pany. It was the contention of the company that the law was a violation of the constitution which guarantees a validity of contracts. Under the terms of its charter the company had Ntlldll uldNlOAo iCf1aAhAA-eo the time of the payment of it's en- ployes and that its contracts with them recognized the terms of payment with respect to time.
 The opinion of the court upholds the validity of the lay and affirms the judgment of the lower court.
 In the case of Mary M. Mannion, ap- pellant, against Theodora w. Marsh, appelle, from Santa Cruz county, the judgment of the lower court is re versed with directions that the appel lees complaint be dismissed. In this case the appellant had made a home stead entry including a tract of about eight acres upon which the appellee asserted some sort of a claim. It was the contention of the appellant that the government having permitted her to file on the several legal subdivisions described, she is entitled to possession of all of it.
 In the case of the Warren company, appellant against L. Willard Whit, q minor, appellee not reversible error was found and the judgment of the lower court of Cochise county was af- firmed. This was an action for dam ages for which a verdict awarding ST. OO0 had been rendered on account of injuries sustained by the overturning of an automobile he was driving on an uneven street.
 nthnr- n or1yc and Harry c. Wheeler, appellants, against Douglua & Sparks Realty com pany, appellee, Cochise county, juds ment affirmed; Francisco Porras, ap- pellant against the state of Arizona. respondent. Greenlee county affirmed The appellant had been guilty of vio- lating the prohibition law. An appeal was taken on the ground that there was insufficient evidence to convict. The supreme court held that though the evidence was conflicting that was a matter for the jury to decide In the case of H. s. COrbett, trustee, appellant against s. L. Kingan, ap- police and Ferrand O. Benedict, de iOhuohN' llOiil iilid tOuHlN, lHt JuuS- ment of the lower court was reversed and new trial ordered.
 Motions for rehearings were denied in the following cases: Southern Pa cific Railroad company vs. State of Ar iZona; William Henry Marshall vs. State of Arizona; Eugene s. Ives vs F.. F. Sanguinetti; R. M. Fuqua vs State of Arizona; O. B. Hall and J. J. Elliott ys. State of Arizona.
 The Southern Pacific case is one in which the right Of the state corpo- ration commission to fix rates al which circus trains shall be transported with in the state is upheld. The Marshall l Fuqua and Hall and Elliott cases are bOOtlegging cases. R. M. Fuqua is a wealthy Phoenix man who was con victed about a year ago of violation oi the prOhibitory law in illegally trans porting by motor car. intoxicating liqu
 or across the state line. J. J. Elliott did not join in the motion for a rehear ing as he was pardoned by the gover nor