Nashville daily patriot. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1855-1857, 1856-01-05
CASES AT JANUARY TERM, 1sse

Jnder the above hulc~ thc !
trial during the first week Of q
CASES AT JAM
1St Week.
1 Den lessee vs.. Mslloy;
2 Seay vs. Cameron;
3 Morrow VS.. Napier;
4 Stanfield VS.. same;
8 Pointer vs.. same;
6 Flowers VS.. same;
I kirkman vs.. same;
S Travis vs.. Wallare;
0 Lawrence w. Nashville 4
II llsbOro' Turnpike Co;
10 s eiby vs.. Martin;
II Same VS.. Wetmore;
~ Winston vs.. F d.;
IL Walker vs.. Ba'es;
Il Mayor and Aldermen Of
Nashville exparte;
Is Young vs.. Corbett;
16 Doe lessee VS.. Ray;
II GJEdey use &c. VS.. Mar.
shall;
Is same vs.. same;
9 Baldwin vs.. Elliott;
81 Mnsley vs.. Gi liam;
81 Brinkley vs. McDole;
~ York \ Co vs.. Mckenzie;
zS MeCamPbeli vs.. Bell;
"a same VS.. Bel Z K0hards;
25 Due lessee ys. McEgen;
&c Jasper ct al W. Barns;
u Law horn vs.. Davis;
Is Sloan VS.. Haskell;
99 McGHvoek VS.. Gilman
81 Mctiavock & Co vs.. same
81 Jones VS.. Mitchell;
81 Mayor and Aldermen oi
Nashville exparte;
80 State of Tennessee use
&c VS.. Smell ct al;
"a McCampbell vs.. Clemons;
81 Jackson's Ex'rs VS.. Gil
bert a Son;
SO Charlotte Turnpike Co vs..
Spence;
~ Cross vs.. Green ct al;
80 Evans 4 Smith VS.. Shivers
ct al;
80 FoTehand &c VS.. Farrell;
40 Chilcutt vs.. Mcintyre;
A. Martin vs.. Armstrong;
~ Cruns VS.. James;
- Charlotte turnpike Co vs.
Spence;
A. Fay VS.. Sloan:
45 Ayres i Matthews vs.. G'l-
bert;
A6 Hyde VS.. Maddox;
~ Davis vs.. MOseley;
4S Charlotte Turnpike Co.
Va. Spence;
80 Hughes vs.. Gilbert;
81 Alien ys. GoOurich;
81 Frazier vs. steamboat To.
ledo and owners,
SO Goldberg VS.. Hinton;
SO Harris vs.. Smiley ex'r;
81 Rang Of Tpuues. VS.
Greene ct al,
IS McKee admir- vs.. Noel
20 Same vs.. Same;
81 Bank Oi Tennessee W
NeWsOm;
Sc McGavock rs. Paul ct al
SO Same VS.. Tucker ct a.;
I'd ~ eek
so Wilson ex'rX vs.. Goo win
et al;
81 johnson vs.. RatcliGe;
So same vs.. 0TtOn et al;
% MInnfacturi, < Company
v Hab0s Henly;
60 Lowry VS.. Dabbs;
g. Adelphi Theatre Co VS.
Greene;
&c Harrison & Richardson vs.
Boiling & Stratton;
CT De La VerRne vs.. Dodge,
IS Martin VS.. Ensiey;
90 Williams & H.tch'ngs ",
Glover 4 Boyd;
90 Reli VS.. Davis;
II L & n Railroad Co vs.
N. 0. Love;
70 same vs.. Walker;
I3 same vs Gee;
u same vs.. MsynOr;
IS same VS.. Sledge;
70 Martin vs.. FusseIl et al;
II McEwen, use 6c rs Nor
ton ct al;
rs Watkins VS.. Barns;
70 Nance VS.. Moore ct M;
50 Pa quett vs. Austin;
s. Snegog VS.. Roberts, ad'r
50 Sloan ex'rX vs.. Halle;
50 Carmichael vs.. King ct al
81 Hail y vs.. WetnOre;
SIS Wilkinson, ct al vs.. clin
ard;
Sc Eatherly vs. VinSon;
81 Morse & Son VS.. Hess;
IS Nash & Char Turnplk,
vs.. Spence;
So Bell trus ee VS.. Nc OOnals
pn Bell trust, e vs.. SImuels
81 State Of Tenn, u-r, &C
W. DOdd;
% Dotson admir- &C vs. DabbI
93 Sun icy ". Den os- adm
"a Chihlress vs.. Jackson;
95 Greer VS. Jordan.
81 Hammer VS. Carroll, Ag't.
" Ament VS.. Taylor;
- UeLahay vs.. Lawrence;
50 Cunningham vs. M'Comb.
4 Cornelius
leo Mclaughlin vs. Kimi'rO;
l01 French vs.. Duncan, Nor,
gan 4 Co;
l02 Lowe admir- VS.. sloan;
los Tal Tor vs.. s Boat Beauty
ct al,
lA4 Gilman VS.. Kimbru;
100 Mattht wson vs. Philips;
u6 Kimbio vs.. atsOn;
lO7 steel s. l. a RRCo:
t0S buchanan vs.. Joseph;
lu9 Nancy trustee vs. Il gley,
llO Demos admir- vs. kuss u
ct al;
Ill Scales VS.. Tenn. ard Ala
Railroad Co;
liz Inoney VS.. 6r'Ezard;
ll3 Burger vs. Brien;
~ Austin We. Ha 5;
I 5 Bland vs.. Boiing;
il6 Boyd vs.. " oOds ariet al
M B'k of Tenn VI. McNairN
ei al
rs Bells sx'r vs.. BIZ Of Trur
ilg bank Of ennesse- vs.
Mclaughlin,
1870 Jackson vs.. Bel:
III Anthony, jr., W Jackson,
iZ2 Beech W. Pointer u-e &C
vs.. Bell;
1913 Raker VS. Jackson.
Ia Buwen ct al vs. steven
SOD q al,
LIS Brunson ct al vs.. Hick
nan et al;
1876 Bank, Plsntzrs vs.. Hud
son:
I2T Bolton ct 81 W. Kimbro;
l2s Berry, use &c. vs.. Foster
adm'r
i99 Carte W. Hamilton st NJ
lg0 Childress vs. .IohnsO, ct O.
ini Same ". d, CO Jones et Al
i82 same vs.. jackson ~ al,
la3 same vs Oven et al,
iS4 Collins vs.. Gregory;
lA5 COuss' o. We. M0unss;
lS5 CsTtwr ghl " Smell e a
1877 Chavous VS. Dickinson et
Al.
l9s Douglass W. Turnpike GO
l39 D.ckey vs. Manufacturing
Company,
l40 Demos vs. Bell;
l4l Ftnning y Bartlett;
I42 FIRING vs.. Zimmerman et
~,
i43 Paris vs.. Hundley;
lf5 Foster, uus. ee Va Nc
Marry;
l45 Goodwin W. Paul e al
lac urc, nheld a Co. "a Man
ufanturing Conn any.
l4i Gle v-ses Al W. Jackson
et al,
i5s Gray ". Holt, agent;
is9 Glover vs. TeiegT aph Co,
Sd week.
i5e ChiirrSs VI AaFor a Al
dsrmrn " Nashville.