Nashville daily patriot. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1855-1857, 1856-01-04
CASES AT JANUARY TERM, 1876

Cuit r the above Rules the I
trial during the H. st week Of q
CASES AT JANU
1SI Week.
! Den lessee w. NJ illoy;
2 Say vs.. Cameron;
8 MorreE vs.. Napier;
( S'an6eld VS.. same;
5 Pointer VS.. SANE;
6 Flowers vs.. same;
7 Kirkman We. same;
S Travis vs., Wallare;
9 I,agrence vs.. Nashville {
II lisboru' Turnpike Co;
10 s rlby vs.. Martin;
II S Sim- VS.. Victim re;
~ Winston W. Fe'd.;
IL Walker vs. Ba e.;
IL Mayor and Aldermen O.
Ma, hvi lr eXparte;
Is Young vs.. Corbett;
l6 DIE lessee vs.. Ray;
II q Hdey use &C. VS.. Mar
shall;
iS same vs.. same;
9 baldwin vs.. EliOtr;
2 VI 'sley vs.. Gi liam;
~ Brink eyys McDole;
% York = Co VI. McKenni'
% McCampbelI vs.. Bell;
"a same vs. Bel z Rrbards:
p Dne lessee ". McEwen:
26 Jasper ct al v. Barns;
u Lac horn vs.. Davis;
% Sloan ". Haskell;
20 McG4vock W. Giln'an
81 MciiayOck 4 Co vs.. sal
81 Jones vs.. NJ tchell;
8, Mayor ant Aldermen 4
Nash lie exlsarte;
33 State of Tenn see Us
&c VS.. Smell ct al;
"a McCampbeli W.. Clemnn>.
s. JacksOn's Ex'rs vs.. Gil
bert a sOn;
So Charlotte TuI npike Co W.
Spence;
81 Cross Va @ cen IT ~;
IS Evans & Smith W.. Shiver
ct al;
SO Forehand &c We. Farrell
40 Ch,lcutt W. Mcintyre;
A. Martin vs.. Armsti org;
42 Crun. vs.. James;
43 Charlotte turnpike Co We
Spence,
~ Fay vs.. Sloan:
IS Ayrcs a Matthews VS.. G J.
bert;
g Hyde vs.. Maddox;
IL Da' is vs.. Moselry;
as Charlotte Turnpike Co.
VS.. spence,
20 Hughes W. Gilbert;
81 Al'en vs., Goo rich;
81 Frazier " s eambost T,
ledo ana owners,
50 Goldberg vs.. llintnn;
~ Harris vs. Smiley ext;
81 Bans II 1euuvs w
Greefie etai.
55 Mckee adn'r vs.. Noel
&c san = vs.. same;
= Bank VI Tennessee v.
NrwsOm,
IS NcGavock vs.. Paul ct al
80 Sane vs.. Tucker ct al;
I'd " eek.
co wilson ,X'ix VS.. Goo win.
e al;
81 JrhusOn VS.. Ra'cl!ifr;
62 same vs.. 0rton ct al;
t3 Manufacture Z Compau,
Y II hos Henly;
Sc Lowry vs. Dabbs;
g. Adelphi Theatre Co VS.
Greene;
&C Harrison 4 Richardson VS.
Boiling a Strafton;
81 ne La Nergne vs. Dooge;
IS Martin vs.. Enslry;
% Williams 3 Hitch ngs v .
Glover a Boyd;
~ Nell vs.. Davis;
Il l. 4 \ Railroad Co vs.
N -. Love;
- same VS.. Walker;
q same vs. Gee;
- same W. Mayor;
I5 sune w Sltdge;
I6 Martin vs.. Eusse'l et NJ;
- McEwen, use &c rs u.
ton eta;
- Watkins vs. Barns;
~ Nance vs.. Moo E et %;
III Pa guetl vs. Austm;
5 Sregug VS. RObtFt~, ad'r,
- SllaH eX'rX W. llail';
u Caru ichael W. King IT al;
81 Hail y ". Vet aoie;
IS Wilkinson, et q vs.. Gin
ard;
So Eaiherly vs. Vinson:
81 Morse 4 Snn vs.. Iiess;
IS Nash & CLar Turnpike
vs.. SPENCE;
50 Bell trus eP W. McDonald
~ Bell trust { VS.. 5 murlsi
81 State Of Tenn, u-r, &c
". DOdd,
% Dotson admir- &C W Dahh>
% Sm ry ". Den 0 = adm ;
- Chilsn e.s vs.. Jackson;
g) e. eer vs. Jordan:
~ Hum er vs. Carroll ag't.
~ Amrnt vs.. Taytpf;
- trIahay vs.. lawrenre;
- Cunningham IS N'COmbs
& Cornelius;
i"o Mclaughlin ~. kimi-ro,
lOl French We. Duncan, Nor
gau a Co;
it;2 Lowe adm'r vs.. SloaL;
i,3 Ia, Tor ". s Boat Beauty
ct al
& Gilman vs.. Kimbru;
% Matth,w,On W Philips,
g kmbto vs.. alison,
Id steel 5. IA RR 60;
"s buchanan vs.. JOsetsh;
40 MtneN fIustse W R.glry;
no DemOss adm'r vs.. kuss u
ct al;
Ill Scales vs.. Tenn and Ala
Railroad Go,
ll2 lcOney vs. brizLal d,
ID Hurger vs. Brien,
"a Austin W. liza ,;
> Bland VS.. kOlinp;
ll6 RnydY,. " oOiSaFIetaI.
ia Be- VI Tenn vs.. McN airy
efal
rs Bells ear vs.. BR OF Ttnl
10 rank Of 1ennesse- vs.
Mclaughlin,
l20 Jatkson W.. bel;
vi An hony, jr., W J lcsson
l22 re,oh vs.. P0 nter u E AZ
vs.. Bell,
1913 Paker VS. Jackson.
I BUNsn et al W Stev'n
son et hl
rs Brt nsOn et ~ ". liick
msn et vi.
1928 Bank, Plsntsrs Ys. lsud
sen,
i2T b. lton et al ". K'mbro;
l2S berry, n,e 4e. Ss. Foster
adm'r
10 Carte vs.. Hamilton et a.
| a Chiidress ". lehnso eta
! same vs. d. c Jones ct n
lS2 saue W IAci son tt al;
! ) Same vs ONen rt ai;
l34 Coilu.> vs. Greg ~.
10 CO. s"n vs.. MounlE;
ls6 CAr.NT,h W snell ct al
la3 ChsyOus vs.. Die.in,on ,il
al.
l9S Douglass W. Turnpike Cn
l39 D.ckcyis Manuiaeturin,
Company
i40 DemS - W neiI;
al Pnning v. Bartlett:
i42 fr'ng vs.. Z mmerman sil
NJ, |
~ FArrs vs.. Hundley,
- FOstsT, uuses vs. Nc
Nair3;
ls5 Hoo'l~ia W. Paul e ~ ,
li5 orr n igta 4 Co. - tian [
ufaciuituK TOM Any.
l4l G.e set al ". Jack sOn
et al,
Ia Gray W. lloli, AgrHt.
i39 oliver " TriegI aph &C.,
Sd week.
tSe Chiairsss vs Ag0r 4 Al
q rmvR VI Mach vile;
ISL Driver vs.. liitclings.
i53 lian vs., VA L PogSrs;
decli-Oav4w
NAxs.