Constitutional Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1824-1832, 1832-11-30
COURT OF APPEALS.
SATURDAY, NOV. II.


Sharer, &c. VS.. Soopinger, .Sc.-Appeal from
tho late superior court of chancery at Winchester.
Dismissed for want Of appearance
Thatcher VS.. BraIfeld.- Appeal from the supe-
ror court Of chancery at Winchester. Dismissed
by agreement of the parties.
MONDAY, Nov. 70.
Wade d others Greenwood Il others.--Peti-
ton OF appeal from decree OF The superior
court of law and chancesy for the town of Lynch
burg. Refused.
iAorntan VS. Gordon, .ye.--Pettion of appeal
from decree of the cir sic E6 lior court OF law
and chanccry for SPOTS lylrit lowed,
President 4 Directors al The Igaca5i9 0aG Sd-
lem IWnPike Company Bro,vn.--i-t,.,sI f.T
supersedoasto a Judgment of the circuit superior
court Of law and chanccry for Lynchburg. Allow
cd.
C0bbs g. Garland VS.. Capitalization FOR super.
sedeaS Judgment Of the circuit superior court
for Bedford county. Allowed.
Rogers ad,nr. vs.. ChcSnut.-Upon a revived APP
peal from the superior of law of Bath county.
Argued by Johnson for the appellant and Baccbus
for The appellee.
Buck VS.. PemnyJacker's eror.-Upon an appeal
from decree Of the late superior of chance-
~ Il: Winchester Argued by Briggs for the ap-
pel!amt aud johnson for the appellee.
TUESDAY, Nov. 30.
Hutton w. characterization for appeal from
decree Of The superior court Of law and chancery
for Frederick county. Denied,
fnOr Smith q Boisseau Petition for a su.
per>edcas to Judgment of tic superior court ofaw
for Petersburg. Allowed.
Williams Snidoo.-Appeal from Judgment
of the superior court of law for Giles county. Ar.
guod by Johnson for the appellant and Daniel for
the appellee.
Crimes VS. JoneS.-Upon a revived appeal from
the Lyhchburg ehaneery court Argued by John
Tor the appellant, NO appearance for the pei
Ice.
Dream VS.. Hdtch's ad.-Upon revived appeal
from the superior court OF law of Kanawha. Ar
gnsd By Briggs for appellant, by Johnson for the
appelice, and by Nicholas IN reply,
NEDsEsDAY, Nov. 81.
Clark VS.. LeaOz.-Dcaih Of both parties sug-
gcsted and subpoena to revive. Awarded
Boieyer'S odmr. VS. CheSHnt.--Appeal from tho
superiour court of Bath county. Reversed with
COSTS
Farmers Bunk VS.. Mutual assurance Sociefy.-
Appeal from the chancery court at Richmond Ar
gred by Nicholas for the appellant, and partly argu.
od by Johnson for the appellee.
THURSDAY, Nov. 90.
Buck vs. PcHnybdcker's errors An appeal from
The late Winchester chancory court. Decree al
Eirmed.
TURNER'S Bank vs. N. 4. .Socefg Appeal from
concluded his argument for the appcllecs and Mr..
Leigh replied for the appellants
FRID@Y, Nov. 80.
/ Fisher VS.. U1ssetrS 0dDPrs.-HppcaI allowed
from decree Of the circut superior court of law
| and clIsnccry of Honrco county,
Ordres VS.. JOnss.-Appeal from decree Of Che
late byDchburg chancery court. Decree reversed
and cause remanded.
Gillian vs.. MO0re.--Supersedeas TO iudpme NJ
| OF Goochland superior court. Argued by hlr, Da-
piel and Mr.. Lyons for the plaintiff i'm error, and
Mr.. Nicholas and sIr. Forbes for the defendant,
| Kim VS.. Dnris,-Appcal from Campbell superior
court Abatcd by appellants death,
SATURDAY, Nov. 81,
Bor"ley's 0oi7"rs. S.c. vs. Duke 5eihers-App
allowed from decree of the superior eoori Of law
and chancery Of Essex county
| Iaiicferro VS.. G0r1cHs-Appeh allowed from a
decree Of the superior court of law and chanssry o
's.Sgol sylyanio county.
g: Sheerer-- Pctaios Tor appeal from =
a2klor court of law and cancery oil