Nashville daily patriot. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1855-1857, 1856-01-07

III kh TIL ~ oAAeAAA ~ w. -
issuing subpenas for the with
tend on the Eirsi, second, thi
Term, according 20 the place t
Under the above Rules the I
trial during the first week Of &
CASES AT JAM
1st Week.
l Den lessee VS.. Mailoy;
Q Seay vs.. Cameron;
3 Morrow vs.. Napier;
4 Stanield VS.. same;
5 Pointer vs.. same;
6 Flowers VS.. same;
Z Kirkman vs.. same;
S Travis vs.. Wallace;
Q Lawrence vs.. Nashville 4
II llsboro' Turnpike Co;
10 Shelby VS.. Martin;
II Same vs.. WetmOre;
- Winston VS.. Fields;
13 Walker VS.. Bates;
IA Mayor and Aldermen Of
Nashville exparte;
IS Young VS.. Corbett;
16 Doe lessee vs.. Ray;
II GoRdey use &c. vs.. Mar
shall;
Is same vs.. same;
l9 Baldwin VS.. Elliott;
% Mosley VS.. Gillian;
2l Brinkiey VS. McDole;
% York a Co VS.. Mckenzie;
% McCaInpbell vs.. Bell,
"a same vs. Bell 4 Robsrds;
95 Doe lessee VS.. McEWen;
26 Jasper ct al W.. Barns;
~ Lawhorn VS.. Davis;
29 Sloan vs.. Haskell;
20 McGavock vs.. Gilman
81 McGavock & Co VS.. same
81 Jones VS.. Mitchell;
81 Mayor and Aldermen OF
Nashville exparte;
SO State Of Tennessee use
&C VS.. Smell ct al;
"a MeCampbell VS.. Clemons;
IS Jackson's Ex'rs VS.. Gil
bert L Son;
SO Charlotte Turnpike Co VS..
Spence;
81 Cross VS.. Green ct al;
IS Evans & Smith VS.. Shivers
ct al;
SO Forehand &c VS.. Farrell;
40 Chilcutt VS.. Mcintyre;
Al Martin VS.. Armstrong;
42 Crunb VS.. james;
43 Charlotte Turnpike Co vs.
spence,
~ Fay vs. Sloan;
As Ayres & Matthews vs.. Gil
bert;
sc Hyde vs.. Maddox;
~ Davis VS.. Moseley;
4S Charlotte Turnpike Co.
vs.. spence;
49 Hughes VS.. Gilbert;
80 Allen VS.. GoOdrich;
81 Frazier vs. steambOst To.
ledo and owners;
50 Goldberg vs.. Hinton;
50 Harris vs.. Smiley eX'r;
81 Bank Of Tennessee VS.
Greene ct al;
IS Mckee admir- vs.. Noel,
.6 Same VS.. Same;
81 Bank Of Tennessee VS.
Revsom;
IS McGsvock vs.. Paul ct al
80 Same VS.. Tucker et a.;
I'd Week.
GO Wilson eX'rx VS.. Goodwin
ct a.;
81 Johnson vs.. Raiolide;
62 same VS.. 0rton ct a.;
63 Manufacturing Company
vs.. Hobbs = Henly;
64 Lowry vs.. Dabbs;
G5 Adelphi Theatre Co vs.
Greene;
GO Harrison 4 Richardson vs.
Boiling 4 Stratton;
6I De La Nergne vs.. Dodge;
6S Martin vs.. Ensley;
90 Williams & iIitchings vs..
Glover i Boyd;
40 Bell vs.. Davis;
II l. & y Railroad Co vs.
y. o. Love;
" same VS.. Walker;
70 same vs.. Gee;
"a same VS.. Maynor;
Is same VS.. Sledge;
76 Martin vs.. Russell et al;
II McEwen, use &c vs. Sior
ton ct al;
Is Watkins vs.. Barns;
70 Nance VS.. Moore ct al;
81 Pa quett VS.. Austin;
81 Snegog vs.. Roberts, ad'r;
So Sloan eX'rX VS.. Halle;
SO Carmichael vs.. King ct al;
81 Hail, y W.. Wetmore;
SIS Wilkinson, ct al VS.. Gin
ard;
s6 Eatherly VS.. VinsOn;
81 Morse a Son Va. Hess;
IS Nash 4 Char. Turnpike
vs. Spence;
SO Bell trustee VS.. Nc Donald
su Bell trustee vs.. Samuels;
9l State OF Tenn, use, &C +,
vs.. Dodd;
e2 DOtson admir- &c vs. Dabbs
80 Smiley vs.. DSmoSs ad'mr;
81 ChildTess vs.. jackson;
IS Greer vs.. Jordan;
81 Hammer vs.. Carroll, sg't;
" Ament vs.. Taylor;
9S Del.aEay vs.. Lawrence;
80 Cunningham vs. M'Combs
& Coz nelius;
100 Mclaughlin ~. Kimhro;
l0l French VS.. Duncan, Nor
gan & Co;
i02 Lowe admir- vs.. Sloan;
l0S Taylor VS.. S Boat Beauty
et al,
in4 Gilman vs.. Kimbro:
los Matthewson vs. Philips;
lt6 Kimbro vs.. Watson,
l01 Steel IS. l. & RRCo;
IuS Buchanan vs.. Joseph;
100 Nancy trustee vs Bgley;
1l0 Demoss admir- vs.. Russ III
et al;
Ill Scales VS.. Tenn. and AlG.
Railroad Co;
i12 Jooney VS.. Grixzard;
ll3 Burger vs.. Brien;
ia Austin VS.. HAS;
/ . Bland Va. Boling;
lie Boyd vs.. Woodward ct al,
III B'k OF Tenn vs.. McNairy
et al.
IFS Bells ex'r vs.. BIZ Of Tenn
ll9 Bank Of Tennessee vs.
Mclaughlin;
i20 Jackson vs.. Bell:
III Anthony, jr., vs. Jackson;
l22 Beech vs.. Pointer u>e &C.
vs. Bell;
1873 Rsker vs. Jackson,
LA BOwen ct al Vs steven
son ct al,
l25 Brunson ct al vs.. Hiek /
man et al.
i26 Bank, Planters vs.. Hud
son; (
12T Bolton et a. W. Kimbro; ,
LIS Berry, use &c. W. Poster 4
adm'r
l99 Garter vs. Hamilton et ai |
1870 Childress vs.Johnson eta
Isl Same vs.. Dock Jones et al
lS2 Same vs. Jackson et al;
lsS Same vs.. Owen e. al;
l34 Collins vs.. Gregory;
l85 CoUsss n vs.. Mounts;
1876 Cartwright vs.. Smell ct al
lST ChAVOus vs.. DiczinsCn Ell,
al;
Us Douglass ". Turnpike 90 4
IS9 Dickey VI. Manufacturing
Company 4
30 Demoss rs. Bell, I.
Al Tanning W Bartlett; z.
80 fring vs.. Zimmerman ct.
Al; 4.
IS Farris VS.. Hundley; =
la Foster, trustee vs.. Nc.
NAiry; b
~ GoodSin Va. Paul et al
4S Gre nfseid 4 Co. ss Man.
Hfactufing Company: i
~ Gleavss et Al Va. jackson .
ei al; /.
4S Gray ys. Holt, agent;
20 Glossr W. Telegraph Co.. (;
Sd Week. Z
80 Chndress vs.. Mayor 4 Al I
drrmrn Of Nashville;
81 Driver VI. Hitchings: 4
81 Hanf vs. n 4 i Posers;
deell-oaE4E
Valentines
II II IL IP y.
Talentins Manufacturer.
~ UsUEffTEFfTV .,,,.,,v.....