Hackett v. People (Colo.)....... Hall v. Superior Court (Cal.)... Hall v. Superior Court (Cal.)... .777 611 316 511 138 ... 519 idated Min. Co. v. (Nev.).......... 480 Roberts, McKinney v. (Cal.) 600 Spencer v. Houghton (Cal.).. 718 Sprague v. Missouri Pac. R. Co. Rodgers v. Central Pac. R. Co. (Cal.) 377 Rutherford, Adams v. (Or.)................ 896 St. Louis, F. S. & W. R. Co., Cohen Sample v. Sample (Kan.).... .... 248 Soher, Ganahl v. (Cal.).. 650 Soldati, Taylor v. (Cal.)... 518 Solomon R. Co. v. Jones (Kan.)..... 730 3 Co. v. Community Ditch & Reservoir Co. (Colo.)... 919 ... 679 855 88 San Francisco Stock & Exchange .... 94 Savage v. Savage (Or.).... 754 Schermerhorn v. Mahaffie (Kan.)... 199 State v. Gormally (Kan.). 420 199 State v. Gray (Nev.).... 456 Schiefferly v. Tapia (Cal.). 878 State v. Harris (Nev.)... 462 Schmidt, State v. (Kan.) 867 State v. Head (Kan.)... 722 Schneider v. Sears (Or.) 841 State v. Horton (Nev.).... 171 Schneider, In re (Or.)... 289 State v. Iseman (Kan.). 391 ... 769 367 367 246 Stratton v. Graham (Cal.). State v. Schmidt (Kan.).. Page 867 Tidball, Williams v. (Ariz.)............... State v. School-district No. 3 (Kan.) 208 Tom Louey, State v. (Or.). State v. Showers (Kan.). State v. Skinner (Kan.)... State v. Smith (Or.)... State v. Snyder (Kan.).. . State v. Tatlow (Kan.)... Page 351 353 833 667 474 Toomey v. Reilly (Cal.). 420 Tucker v. McCoy (Colo.)...... 343 Turner Casing Co., Anglo-American 860 Packing, etc., Co. v. (Kan.)....... 403 267 Tyrrell, Hobart v. (Cal.)............ 525 420 353 United States V. Christofferson 478 (Ariz.)..... State, Atchison Nat. Bank v. (Kan.) State, Roberts v. (Kan.).. Steele, Case v (Kan.).. Steiger, Lewis v. (Cal.).. Stevens, People v. (Cal.).. Stewart v. Taylor (Cal.).. Stewart, McClung v. (Or.). Stinson v. Portes (Or.).. Stone, Bullard v. (Cal.).. .. 295 United States v. Kemp (Ariz.)...... 295 United States v. Tenney (Ariz.)..... 295 Vaca Valley R. Co., Butcher v. (Cal.) 174 Vernia, City of Denver v. (Colo.)... 656 242 Victor M. & M. Co., Martin v. (Nev.) 161 884 548 .... Strother, People v. (Cal.). 383 Watson, Meade v. (Cal.).........311, 314 Strother, Smith v. (Cal.). 852 Wattier v. Miller (Or.). 354 Sullivan v. Phoenix Ins. Co. of Webster, State v. (Kan.).. 478 Weck, Wyrick v. (Cal.). . . 522 Sullivan, People v. (Cal.)... 520 Western News Co. v. Wilmarth Sulphur Bank Quicksilver Min. Co., County of Lake v. (Cal.).... 593 Wheeler, In re (Kan.).. 276 Sun Ins. Co., Enos v. (Cal.). 379 Wheeler, Kirkpatrick v. (Colo.)... 654 Superior Court, Bradley v. (Cal.)... Superior Court, Hall v. (Cal.)... Superior Court, Hall v. (Cal.). 617 White v. Douglass (Cal.). 801 6 White, Schnider v. (Or.) 652 509 Williams v. Tidball (Ariz.) 351 Superior Court, Hirschfeld v. (Cal.). Superior Court, Myrick v. (Cal.).. Surryhne, Myres v. (Cal.)... Swain, In re Estate of (Cal.).. Sweeney v. Schultes (Nev.). Sweeney v. Stanford (Cal.). Swift v. San Francisco Stock & Ex change Board (Cal.)..... Tapia, Schiefferly_v. (Cal.). Taylor v. Central Pac. R. Co. (Cal.) 436 497 104 14 769 Woffenden v. Charaleau (Ariz.). 302 94 Wood v. Brady (Cal.). 599 Wood v. Dickinson (Kan.).. 205 878 Woolf, Cahn v. (Kan.).. 192 267 Taylor v. Middleton (Cal.).. 594 Woolf, Hargrove v. (Kan.)...... Wright v. Central California Water Co. (Cal.)..... 192 70 Taylor v. Soldati (Cal.). Thorne v. Ornauer (Colo.).. ....... 568 Zimmerman v. Knox (Kan.)....... 104 621 Zellerbach, Cross v. (Cal.). 714 1. ALLEGATIONS OF COMPLAINT-EFFECT ON PERSON NOT PARTY. A party in one action is not bound by allegations in a complaint in another action to which he is not party. 2. JUDGMENT AFFIRMED. No error appearing in the record, judgment affirmed. Commissioners' decision. Department 2. Appeal from superior court, Los Angeles county. F. H. Howard and J. R. Scott, for appellant. David Lyon and Howard & Roberts, for respondents. FOOTE, C. Action on four promissory notes. Appeal from the judgment for plaintiff, and the order denying defendant a new trial. The complaint stated a cause of action, and the demurrer thereto was properly overruled. From the findings of the court it appeared that recovery on the first note was, as claimed in the answer, barred by limitation under section 337, Code Civil Proc. The recitals of facts in those findings negative the existence of all other defenses set up in the answer; and the material issues raised by the pleadings were considered and passed upon. The evidence, although in some respects conflicting, sustains the findings, and they support the judgment. The court reserved its ruling upon an objection made by the plaintiff to the admission in evidence of a complaint filed in another action by E. A. Mellus, assignee of Adelida Alexander, against Lalla Mellus, and which the defendant claims has never been ruled upon. A ruling should have been made upon that objection, but the defendant here suffered no injury. That complaint was incompetent as eviv.SP,no.1-1 |