Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1834-05-16
COURT OF APPEALS.
.Ho,isf0u mill

COURT OF APPEALS.
Monday. .9p,H7.
Duncan vs.. Hrigh. New superseded. awarded.
Tuesday. .9piHS.
Creei vs.. BeckciM. Aiii,meJ.
James VS.. Conner. Argument continued by Johnson
Tor the appellee and concluded by Staard Tor the appel
liant, in reply.
TVeinesdoy. AprH g.
Hinton's adj vs. Hughes. Petition for appca from the
Superior Court OF Law and Chancery for Henrico. Re
fused.
Mayor, SC of Richmond vs. Judah Appeal from the
judgment OF the Superior Court OF Law for Hrnrco.
gument by Johnson, for the appellant, and by Sanar for
tho appellee.
Gru6er VS.. Gru6er. Dis,ns- ed. Agreed.
Mayor, Sc Of Rich nond vs.. Judah. Argument con.
inued 10y Johnson Tor the appellant aud by S,anard,
the appellee, in reply.
+, idoy, ap,HII
Wdfts We. Wrign Dismissed. Agreed.
Tdts vs. Sharpe. Dismissed. Agreed
Saturday, -apri IL.
French VS.. Commonwealth Dismissed.
Pmham vs.. Hinsfo" Appea. from the Superior
Court OF Law and Chanceiy for Hanover. Argued Nv
Lyons Tor the appellant by Z. Robinson, Tor the appellee
and by Lyons, ia reply.
orunp VS. Nicholas. Afiirn,cd
Clarke vs.. Eankiin. Reversed.
Mcdaniel vs.. .4Hen Appeal from the decree Of the
Superior Court o. Law and Ch'ncery for Amher.t county
Argued by Sanard for the liant, by Johnson for the
appellee, aud by S,an"rd, in reply.
7utsdoy, -ap,u Is.
SPd"giT VS.. SnoPp Reversed. Re-argument asked
by the appellee. and allowed single point aud con.
iibued till next term.
Hyfe vs. MEX. Appeal from the decree of the lsie
Superior Court OF ChanceIy at snunion Argued by
Johnson, Tor The appellant, by Sanard for the sppelIee
Wednesday. .qpra Ie.
Cdrfhrae Va. Clark. Affirmed.
Tones vs. Buford Appeal from the decree Of the late
Superior OEDn OF Chancery Richmond. Argued hy
Johnson Tor The appellant, By the Attorney General aud
stanard, for the sPpellee, aud by Jonson in reply
Thursday, dwHl7.
Jones Jones' Stanton Chancety Court Certiorari
moved for aud a. arled.
late Superior Cour, Of Chanerry at Lswisbug. Argued
by Johnson, Tor the appellant, by aar for appellee
and by Johnson, in reply.
BeiTne w. Mann. Appeal from the late Superior
Cour, Of Chaucery at Lewbnrg. Argued by johnson,
for the appellant, by SanArd, Tor the appellee and by
10 nSoh, III reply.
JTade vs.. Bo1ley. Appeal fom the Le Suueior
Cour oil Chsncery al Lyuchburg. Argued by Johnson,
Tor The appellant, by sianad, Tor the appellee, aud
Johnson, IN reply
Friday. -qyrH 49,
Nam, vs. Druy. Reversed and sent back for further
proce edings.
.afoyore Richmond vs. Judah Reversed
Ellis W.. U'arts. Agreed.
IHurm0nd vs.. PiHs. Appeal from decree of the
Superior Court Of Chancery Lynchbu,g. Argued by
Sanard for the appellant by johnson Tor the sppeiIee and
by Stanard, III reply.
Saturday, AprHl9
LochTidge vs. MdTrOu. Appeal from the decree of
the late Superior Court Of ChsEcery Lewisburg Ar
que by Stanar, for the appellant by Johnson Tor The ap.
pellee, aud by johnson, in reply.
Gibson Jones Appeal he decree Of the late
superior Court OF Chaneery at Richmond. Argued by
Johnson, Tor the appellant.
.MOHddV, .4pTiI 2I.
PudIidm W.. Winsfvn. Reversed.
.He Daniel Va. yAHen. Affirmed
Jones rs. BiyOTd. Reversed and both di.nissed
Gibson W.. Jones' Argument continued by the Ator
ney General Tor the appeee aud concluded y johnson
for the appellant.
These FIVE cases were
heard toge ther. They
Le'He'S er or ys. PTifehdTd. were appeals from
same vs. same Judgments Of the Sup.
same VS. SnHIe. Court Of Law Of Hen.
SCOTT vs. ooWe rico county, and were
same VS. same. argued Oh this day, 10
psr, by :. Taylor, for
he appellants.
Tuesday. .4prIl %
LesHes cr'0r vs.. Priiehard. Argument continued
same VS. Same by :. Taylor for the
same vs. same SaPpeliaul, aud by John
SCOT vs. Same. aud Daniel, Tor the
Same Same. appelee
Hgae vs. Wed Reversed for small error in cacu.
'auoh' aDd decree en'e'fd Tor The proper
Wednesddy, ApTH %.
Lesiir's er'Or vs.. PIiichard.
Same vs. Same. Argument con inued
same vs. same. Ply Johnson, for the sp-
S S vs. S Same PeIee
ThHsdoy. AprH "a
Leshe's er'or w. Prfchdrd, Argument continued,
Same Same. by johnson Tor lie az,
same vs.. Sdme' Speli'r, and by the At
Scott W. Same. ofney Gene, AL for ,he
Same vs.. Same arp, liant i'm repIv
Friday, apra 25
Leshe'S er'or vs. PIifehGTd I
Same Same Argument con,;,osd
S s vs.. same ply The Attorney Gene
SfOH SdnIe. raj. i'm renIv
Same SGnIP.
Jones vs.. Comsr. Affirmed.
DOnndHg Gen0H Affirmed
Saturday. dprH 26.
Leshc's er'or vs. Prifchdrd, I
same vs. same Argument concluded
same V same Si'y the tofney Gene
so0,t vs. same raj. 10 reply.
Brine Mann Reversed
.HGiHdud Vs. Desch0zss p. Gtion for sp,e,seJs.,
TO the jU gmen Of Tie Sup Cour OF Law and Ch.nrsrv
cd
AondGg. aprd %.
Cresdp vs.. McLenn Affirmed
ThUymoHd IS TVfHs. Affirmed
Lochridge " ShGJr0H Affirmed.
Gibson ". Jones Reversed.
Douglass w. Stump. Apped from decree Of the
Superior Con- OF Chancefy al Winchester Argued nv
Johnson Tor the sPp Ilaui. by Harvey Price Tor tho sp
peliee, and by JOHNSON, in reply
Tuesday, april 20.
Ddds vs. Modison. Appeal ifon, decree Of the late
Soprnor Court Of Chancery At Fiedeiicksburg Argued
by Jobnou Tor The appellant, by Slsnsrd lr the appel
lee, and by Johnson, in reply
IPedne-d0y Aprif30
The end Of the term being ~ near no new cause vac
argued. Tbugsdny AfgD 4
DOugIoss We. Stump. Affirmed
Lesiies er'0r vs. Priteha,d !
Same Same.
Same Vs. Same. Affirmed
ScOt Same.
Same Same.
Friday, May p.