Nashville daily patriot. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1855-1857, 1855-12-17

stated, and publish in one or q
eulatiOn the causes set for trial
and fourth weeks, so that IN
have notice when their attend
Rule 4th. II shall hurtherm
issuing subpenas for the with
tend on the first, second, mi
Term, according 10 the place q
Under the above Rules the Z.
trial during the first week Of Il
CASES AT JANU
1st Week.
! Den lessee vs. Malloy;
2 Seay W. Cameron;
3 Morrow W. Napier;
4 Staniiel1 vs.. same;
5 Pointer ~. sane;
8 Flowers vs.. same,
Z kirkman vs.. same;
s Travis vs.. Wallace:
( Q Lawrence vs.. Nashville 8
H.llsboro' Turnpike CO;
/ 10 Shelby vs.. Martin;
I IL Same vs.. Wetmore;
I 12 Winston vs.. Fieids;
! IL Walker vs.. Bates;
IL Mayor and Aldermen Of
Nashville eNparte;
IS Young vs.. COrbett;
IS Doe lessee IS. Ray;
| IL GoRdey use sc. ". Mar
shall;
/ is same Va. same;
/ 10 Baldwin ". Elliott;
~ Mosley W. Gillian;
| 81 Brinkley vs. McD0ie;
% York & Co W.. Mckenzie:
% McCampbell vs.. Bell;
"a same vs.. Bell 4 R0bards;
IS Doe lessee ". McEwen;
26 Jasper ct al vs.. Barns;
u Law horn vs.. Davis;
2S Sloan vs.. Haskell;
20 McGavOck vs.. Gilman;
80 McGavOck & Co ~. same,
81 Jones vs.. Mitchell;
80 Mayor and Aldermen Of
Nashville eNVarte;
3S State Of Trnnr> see ust
&c rs. Smell ct al;
"a McCampbell W. Ciemons
SIS Jackson's EN'Ts vs.. Gil.
bert & Son;
Sc Charlotte Turnpike Co VS.
Spence;
81 Cross VS.. Green ct al;
80 Evans 4 Smith VS.. Shivers
et al;
80 Forehand &c W. Farrell,
40 Chilcutt vs.. Mcintyre;
al Martin vs.. Armstrong;
az Crunk vs.. James;
/ 80 Charlotte Turnpike Co vs.
Spence;
Al Fay VS.. Sloan;
45 Ayres 4 Matthews vs.. Gil.
bert;
IS Hyde vs.. Maddox;
AZ Davis vs.. Moseley;
Is Charlotte Turnpike Co.
vs.. Spence;
80 Hughes vs.. Gilbert;
50 Allen vs.. GOOIrieh;
81 Frazier W. steamboat To-
ledO and owners;
/ 80 Goldberg vs.. Hinton;
50 Harris ". Smiley eN'r;
I 81 Bank OF Tennessee vs.
Greene e al,
IS Mckee admir- vs.. Noel,
SO Same vs.. same;
81 Bank Of Tennessee vs.
Newsom,
IS McGavock W. Paul ct al
SO Same VS.. Tucker e al;
I'd week.
90 Wilson eX'TX Us. GCoavih
ct al;
81 johnson vs.. RatChfe;
SO same ~. orion Ct al;
g Manufacturing Company
~. HOBBS y Henly;
81 Lowry VS.. Dabbs;
l Is Adelphi Theatre Co W
Greene,
/ &C Harrison & Richardson vs..
Boiling q Strattcn;
I 60 De La Nergne vs.. Dodge;
7 6S Martin vs.. Ensley;
/ ~ Williams 4 Hitchlngs vs..
Glover & Boyd;
20 Bell w. Davis;
. Il l. & n Railroad Co vs.
n. o. Love;
70 same VS.. Walker,
70 same vs.. Gee;
"a same vs.. Maynor;
Is same vs.. Sledge,
70 Martin vs.. Russell etal,
81 McEwen, use &C vs. Nor
ton et al,
rs Watkins vs.. Barns:
/ 20 Nance vs.. Moore ct AZ;
so Pa quett vs.. Austin;
81 Shegog vs.. Roberts, ad'r,
/ 50 Sloan ex'rx ". Halle;
: 50 earn ichael vs.. King eta,
[ 81 HALEY vs.. WetmOre;
So Wilkinson, ct al vs.. Clin
ard;
So Eathprly vs.. Vinson;
81 Morse 4 Son vs.. Hess;
/ IS Nash. & Char. Turnpike
vs.. Spence;
I 50 Bell trustee VS.. Nc Donald
81 Bell trustee VS.. Samuels;
| 81 State Of Tenn, use, &c,
vs.. Dodd;
e2 DotsOn admir- &C vs. Dabbs
80 Smiley vs.. Demoss adm;
"a Childress V. Jackson,
IS Greer vs.. Jordan:
90 Hammer vs.. Carroll, ag't.
" Ament vs.. Taylor;
sS DeLahay vs.. Lawrence;
80 Cunningham VS.. M'Combs
4 Cornelius.
100 Mclaughlin Va. kimbrO;
l0l French VS.. Duncan, Nor
gan 4 Co;
l02 Lowe admir- vs.. Sloan;
Loo Tay Tor vs.. S Boat Beauty
ct al;
I 104 Gilman VS.. KimbrO;
I los MattheWson vs. Philips;
loo Kin.bTO VS.. Watson;
I 1OT Steel rs. l. a K K Co;
les Buchanan VS.. Joseph:
lGg Nancy trustee vs. Bigley,
/ lIO Demos Ad'a'r W. Russell
81 al:
Ill Scales vs.. Tenn. and Ala
Railroad Co;
. il2 Looney vs.. 6Tizzard,
li5 Burger vs.. Bricn,
ia Austin VS.. HAYS;
[ 1l5 Bland vs.. Boiling;
ll6 Boyd W.. " 0OdWard e al.
III B'k Of Tenn vs.. McN airy
e. al,
. lis Bells eN' vs.. BIZ Of Trnr
I ll9 Bank Of Tennessee vs.
Mclaughlin;
I 100 Jackson vs.. Bell,
lzl Anthony, jr., Y, Jackson
Ia Beech VS.. Pointer use &C
". Bell;
i23 Baker vs.. Jackson;
Ia Bowen ct al vs.. Steven
son et al,
Us Brunson ct al vs.. Ilick
man ct al,
l26 Bank, Planters vs.. Hnd
son,
12T Bolton ct Al ". Kimbro;
LIS Berry, use &e. ". Foster
admir-
le9 Garter vs.. Hamilton et Al
$50 Childress vs.Johusoa eta
Isl Same vs.. Do ek Jones et a.
i82 Same VI. JACKSON e al;
Z 1913 Same W. Owen ct al;
l84 Collins W. Gregory;
i35 COIss, n vs.. M0untz;
l35 Cartwright vA. Smell et al
l55 ChAyous vs.. Dickinson Ct
al.
i8S Douglass ". Turnpike Co
1879 Diekey vs.. Manufacturing
Company;
$50 DemOss vs.. Eeli,
l4l Farming Va. Bartlett.
lag frlng vs.. zimmerman ct
III,
l+S FArris vs.. Hundley;
Ia Foster, trustee vs.. Nc
Nary,
i45 Goodwin vs.. Paul ct al
ls6 Gree nheld A Co. IS. Man.
ufactuTing Company;
la Gleayts II n Va. jackson
et al,
las Gray vs.. Holt, agent;
ii9 Glover W Telegraph Co.,
Sd Week.
80 Chndress va Mayor a Al
dernrn " Nashviile;
ISL Driver vs.. Hiichings,
i52 HAM vs.. NAL Powers;
decll-oaU4v
IRON Raj