Nashville daily patriot. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1855-1857, 1856-01-14
CASES AT JANUARY TERM, 1875


Term, according to the place
Under the above Rules the
trial during the first week Of
CASES AT JAN
1Sf Week.
i Den lessee vs.. Malloy;
2 Seay vs.. Cameron;
8 MorFow vs.. Napier;
{ Stanfield VS.. same;
5 Pointer vs.. same;
6 Flowers vs. same;
I Kirkman vs.. same;
S Travis vs.. Wsllare;
9 Lawrence vs.. Nashville 4
II IlsborO' Turnpike Co;
10 S .rlby VS., Martin;
II Slme vs.. Wetmore;
~ Winston vs.. FieidS;
II Walker vs. Bales;
II Mayor and Aldermen Q
Na,hville exparte;
Is Young VS.. Corbett;
l6 Doe lessee vs.. Ray;
II Gov dey use &c. VS.. Mar
shall;
is same vs.. same,
0 Baldwin vs.. Elli0tt;
2 Mnsley VS.. Gillian;
21 Brinkey vs. McDoIe;
% York 4 Co vs.. Mckenzie
zS McCampbell vs.. Bell;
"a same vs. Bel & RnbardS;
q Doe lessee vs. McEven;
26 Jasper ct al vs.. Barns;
~ LaS horn W. Davis;
% Sloan Va. Haskell;
20 MeG4vock vs.. Gilman
81 Mclavoek a 90 vs.. same
81 Jones VS.. Mitchell;
s.! Mayor and Aldermen o
Nasht lie exparte;
SO State Of Tennessee US,
&c vs.. Smell ct al;
"a McCampbell ". Clemons
IS Jackson's Ex'rs va. Gil.
bert 4 Son;
SO Charlotte Turnpike Co vs.
Spence;
81 Cross vs.. Green ct al;
So Evans & Smith VS.. SILVER,
ct nj;
80 Forehand 6c vs.. Farrell.
4U Chilcutt vs.. Mcintyre;
81 Martin vs.. Armstrong;
az CTunS vs.. James;
43 Charlotte Turnpike Co VS.
Spence;
~ Fay vs.. Sloan:
As Ayrcs 4 Matthews vs.. G'l.
bert;
a6 Hyde vs.. Maddox;
~ Davis vs.. Moseley;
is Charlotte Turnpike Co.
VS.. Spence;
80 Hughes We. Gilbert;
So Alien VS.. Goolrich;
81 Frazier VS. steamboat To.
ledo ana owners;
SO Goldberg vs.. Hinton;
81 Harris vs.. Smiley ex'r;
81 Bank Ct Tennesser VS.
Greene ct sl,
IS Mckee admir- vs.. Noel,
!6 Sane VS.. Same;
"a Bank Of Tennessee ys
NewsOm;
Sc McGavock vs.. Paul ct al
SO Same vs.. Tucker ct a.;
I'd ~ eek.
CO Wilson eN'Tx VS.. Goo win
e. al;
6i johnson VS.. RaicliGe;
62 same Sc. OrtOn ct al;
% Mdnuiaeturi ( Company
" H"bbs . Heniy;
64 Lowry vs.. Dubbs;
% Adelphi Theatre Co vs.
Greene;
&C Harrison & Richardson vs.
Boiling Il Stratton,
CT he La Vergne vs.. DoOge;
6S Martin vs.. Ensley;
% Williams a liiIchings ".
Glover & Boyd;
a. Rellvs. Davis;
Il l. & n Railroad Co vs.
N. o. Love;
70 same vs.. Walker,
13 same VS. Gee;
"A same VS.. MRynoV;
IS same vs.. Sledge;
76 Martin vs.. Fussell ct al;
u McEwen, use &C VS. Nor
ton e, a.;
- watkins vs.. Barns,
70 Nance VS.. Moore ct al;
81 Pa quett vs. Austin;
s. SuegOg vs.. RobrrtS, ad'r;
81 Sloan ex'rx vs.. Halle;
So Caru ichael ". King ct al;
81 llail y VS.. Wetnore;
- Wilkinson, ct 81 VS.. Clin
ard;
Sc Eatherly VS. Vinson;
81 Morse 4 Son vs.. Hess;
IS Nash 4 Char Turnpike
vs.. Spence;
SO Bell trus'ee W. Donald
81 Bell trust e vs.. SimurIs;
9l State Of Tenn, use, &C
vs.. DOdd;
% Dotson admir- &c VS. Dsbb'
93 SIN ley -. Den oss adm /;
~ Chlldre,s vs.. jackson;
9S Greer vs.. Jordan:
~ Hammer vs. Carroll, ag {,
81 Ament vs.. Taylor;
- Del.ahay vs.. Lawrence;
80 Cunningham VS. M'COmbs
4 Coz nelius;
100 Mclaughlin ~. Kimhrn;
l0l French vs.. Duncan, Nor
gan 4 Co;
log Lowe admir- vs.. Sloan;
los Taj lor vs., 5 Boat BsRuty
ct al,
ie4 Gilman vs.. Kimbro;
iOb Matthewson vs. Philips;
&c Kimbio vs.. Watson;
iU7 Steel -. l. RCo;
iOS Buchanan vs.. Joseph;
10 Nancy tTustee vs. B,g!ey:
ll0 Demoss admir- vs.. Russ D
et al;
Ill Scales vs.. Tenn. and Al1
Railroad 90,
liz Looney vs. Grizzard;
il3 Burger vs. Brien;
~ Austin VS.. LA ?;
| D Bland vs.. Boiling;
ll6 Boyd W. " oodSari ct al:
III B'k OF Tenn W. Men airy
ei al
lis Bells eX'r Va. Blk Of Tenn
tl9 Bank Of ennesser vs.
Mclaughlin;
1870 Jackson vs.. Bell:
l2l Anthony, jr., W. Jackson
Ia beach W. Pointer u.e &C.
vs.. Bell;
1928 Baker vs. jackson.
la Bowen ct al vs. Steven
son et al,
las Brunson e. al vs.. hick
man ct vi.
l25 Bank, Planters vs.. llnd
son;
i21 Boltou et 81 ". Kimbro;
rs berry, use ke. W. Foster
admir-
lFe Carte' W. Hamilton et Al
iS0 Chlidress vs.Juhnso eta
tal Same vs.. d. CO Jones et a.
lil2 Same Va. 5acksOu e al.
ls3 same vs. Owen et a.;
lS4 Coilius vs. Gregory:
l35 Coz -. q We. AolnfI;
l36 Cartsr ght " Smell etal
l5f ChAvous W. Dieainson eiI
al.
lss Douglass ". Turnpike Co
lS9 DieSey Manuiactarin,
cUmPsny;
40 Demoss ". Belt
al Fanniag v. Bartlett;
I42 Fung vs.. Zimmerman ct
VI,
"a PARIS vs.. Hundley;
Ia Fosier, huaee vs.. Nc
Nary;
i45 Goodwin ~. Paul e. al
ls6 Gre n1rld 4 Co. IS Man
rfActaFing comI any:
la Gie4v.s Il al Va. Jackson
e al,
les Cray ". Holt, agent.
l49 Gl1ser vs Telegraph Co.,
I'D Week.
80 ChisiresE W. siGyor 4 Al
irrmen u Nashville;
l5l Driver ~. flilchinEs;
i53 lsAni ". 81 4 l Powers;
decii-oawlW
Valentines
u IA LIP y
Valentine Manufacturer
ID ESPECTFULLY znnounesi
II Nairntines, that his neg
vhLOPks and NALsNTISE
Ior the next TaisafiHs Seae
really
Having imported from fursl
YER snd illuminst 4 iAre aa1 {