Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1824-08-03
VTlR0INIA-Ata Superior Court of Chancery be,,
v Staunton, July the 9th, 1871


" ssa.nna LII. s, Sss 1e' Vi o"anecry he'll ia
Hsswscn 49,
| And P'ain'a
John NiehoI.s an, N.,., Nt.h.f.. A.. .,,-
ris and David S.oIS ' ~s~'e"' James sH -. DIOR,
This cause came on hi. 2etb dav of J 100 no"nis
ed Sy counsel, On NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS. wh.~s Sau WAS srgu
sdudee and deere thai ,hs I'D .s. he court doth
ncres of lsn.i a ms.m"' T., az Tot onr hundred
and deemed suf6c is M is'h y. - ~ o.'' oe held
asa oe new ieii and sufcient performance par,
and said defendants JOHN Nich.ss. on sSe ss., s sc him
orieinsi bill and marssd <A''eu WAN .ns pAiniGi
The Court doth further sdiudre. order and .e,..
ed BY him frvm George Nichoiss AM,
said George and Anne his Wife by deed bearing date he
nsma usy ., Deesm1er eighteen hundred and nine
"py wns.eol ~ this cause be aud the sane
n%seoy 'reser 9uesed and projected from any claim
fgMor sqaitnose OF MIN the said John NicLoas
assigns do en;oS an, Mold m. s, ., oa heirs and
win ali M osyres .SS OF said
from the claim or claim. 81 him ,hs que. ana free
heirs and assigns forever The Court .h oes:,
judge, order and decree tbn, he I alt
las do pay to The plaintiff The sum Of ~, scss Neho
with interest from The first day Of Juiy
hundred and eleven ti paid that being the eusta
purchase money due no n. r,nn,G IS Of the
jobn Nicholas and .' ~ . oy we PIN 10 the said def
defendants David Bullock and Jsmss M M and the
the plaintiff hi: costs in the Of b y;
cree, that unless the Defendant, Nichoiss shall % ne
an,iG the aforesaid hundred pounds , p1y 10 the
shall sf the Richmond Cianeery Court anne .nen the Mar
tue time and place Of sale for six eeEs in some
Courthouse Of Buckingham Coun,v .hi at the
Of an s :" much o. ne aforesaid
Nhnia as is no, o~ne. by The rre"sn '1s Defendant
Morris in stated in the plaintiffs nmendasorx Inc Sna
ceeds OF saie after deucing the proper costs ana en
he r anu e,s,s hereby accrued 10 him. sufficient there
a,d deendi Nicholas The said Marshal is required c
decree f''ee'''s' 10 'h's court in order 10 final
IL. further ordered and ha, the till.
. as sonr,a"en ~ said ame,daory bill and their an
s~ ~s ne a.e,ss aeans, the ain,f claim Tor be BAL
In pursuance Of, cnr.g,;nn - - o'o
On ,n"ray The 1ei day Of August the premises
,e ,ers n . me same a" execution by sale upon
ao1.e nmsa Iay prove to be unfair, sale Will b
J.GUERRANT, nj. S. C. g.
1aly 10. aO-tds
the Uour, of The Un;,ei $50 ~ e Glefss Once OF
Virginia District in The month OF julv ispa 0"sa' ana
ME Thomas NJ, Kechnie an ma, I"'n Mehesk-
h-cknie hi next friend ' " '""'' oy rnn,ew ale
George Cox, SURVIVING .,.c,,or =, u,u,.
md James Dixon also nm e.ecm,r " ,m noyu Brown
The defendants, Arshiaid Dun T .s Defendants:
,ot having entered the ir and ILL., ns vile,
ording rule of the Car, sn,, q, s seIuIiy nc-
not inhabitants of shs District, on p mat they
Plaintiff by their Counsel n Is 0rd. ,e 1uon OF The
.ndan' appear rs day of The next ,epe an ae
wer the bill Of the paintif, and ,ha, go, ~ ann ai-
re forhw h inserted In some newsnans , sA o'a.e
;ity Of Richmond months succrssiveiy nnd ~ n
II the from oil the Capiio In ,he 60; " posted
copy. Tes,e RICHaRn e J I,S MY w.,
July ~. % a iA'
1 , IRGINIA: A, a f;on.r;.,- 1yoa,; -
The C.nni i S SonIt Vi Chansery holden al
February 1850 "e wy VI "'chmohd' Tue 26th day OF
Jesse Gon,an
Against Plaintiff
John Tin, ..n .,<
John Christian inn I,.,., w '"nh u coleman, dec.
mas Coleman and james Ce oen"n Derr, Coleman, Tho
In conformity viii = ,.crs ~, defendants,
certified by Clerk thereof in these w"u o. appeals
to wit: Al Conr Of anns., uese words virginia,
CITY Of Uicbmond nm tv.,a.I a. Ihe capitol IA the
Jesse CoIeman appellant an..uy January 18th, 1920
executor Of John d. Coleman ,er.a.. LIE, senior,
Jun. Daniel Coepau berry CoIeu.n s." Sn,is'ah,
anu James Coleman aPpellees. Upon an epuesI fara
uec.ee pronounced by The Superior Couu OF Cbsnr.,~
held In Richmond the third day of January 1914
suit between the appellants and snuee.s ,e'1 IN
by their
considered the Transcript Of record Of the deere.
T.; rs OF opnion, that the said decree Is erron1uus
" .he appellants bill, without referring thr
10 commissioner Therefore, il is decreed and