Daily Nashville patriot. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1857-1858, 1857-12-02

81 Knight VS. Sloan
62 Stout vs. Leake ct al;
60 Price vs. Slaughter ct al;
"a Web VS. Ledbetter ct al;
IS Embry ct al vs. Sumner
ct al;
&C Thomas VS. Griffith;
81 Anderson VS. Porter ct al
IS FarnswOrth ct al VS. Rob
ertson ct al;
60 FAin, admir-, VS. NeWsOm
20 Bank VS. Roscoe ct al;
end week
II Bank VS. Polk ct al;
~ Same vs. Same;
70 A dersOn vs. Moore;
u Stratton ct al VS. Colcl
ct al;
Is Brown VS. Turner ct al;
76 Hyde vs. HYDE;
II Woodruff VS. Railroad;
7S Wemo e VS. Samuels;
70 Robertson ct al VS. Bank
50 ~ame vs. Fife ct al;
81 Cameron VS. Sloan;
So adway ct al VS. Elmer
man;
IS yron vs. johnson ct al;
81 Smith vs. Topp;
S. Moonlight " Men fee;
s6 Hollins & % vs. Plumme
Il Go
81 Henl Y VS. Faulkner;
IS Clark vs. Simpson;
SO Foster & Co vs. Summer
hills admir-;
90 Williams, admir-, vs. vii
son;
Of Powers vs. Franklin;
% Scott ct al VS. fandy;
% Wells ct al VS. Bank;
"a Mayor 81 Al1. ex partei
70 Brown vs. Foster;
SO BOwles et al VS. Leake e
al;
81 Goodbare VS. Sane;
s. Baker ct al VS. Same;
90 Chi son VS. Same;
100 Williams ct al vs. Same;
10i Neal vs. KimbrO;
102 Moore vs. Ledbetter ct al
1O3 johnson ct al VS. Maxwell
ct al;
1O4 Guthrie vs. Holt ct al;
lt5 Abby VS. Same;
100 McGavock VS. Tindall e
al;
1O7 Cartwright vs. Tucker e
al;
los Abby VS. Shute;
1O9 Douglass vs. Joyce ct al;
10 lea VS. Barns;
IL Powell vs. Pit;
l12 Butler vs. Thurmend;
10 Wo druff vs. ThaNton;
ia DiSmukes ct al vs. Camp
bell;
115 Same VS. Same;
ll6 Witty vs. Ellis, use, &C;
III Be sty vs. Co poraliOn;
Is Burke vs. Acklin;
ll9 Brusher vs. ampbell;
100 Whirley vs. WetmOre ct
ii Cameron ct al vs. Wet
more;
l22 pendergrast & Co vs. WOr'
ley;
123 CardWeii, admir-, VS. Bren'
men ct al.
1874 Shu e vs. Underwood;
125 Trabue ct a. VI Ledbettel
ct al;
1876 Desha VS. Merrett ct al;
III Bank rs Raybarn ct al;
rs Snowden vs. Cover;
10 Kirkpatrick ct al VI
Young ct al;
1870 Erwin vs. NetU ore;
l8I HAYS vs. n nee;
1872 Gleayes vs. sumner ct al;
1sS Railroad v Cunningham
! A kimbro, use &C, vs. Kim
hro;
1855 Morgan, use &C, vs. John,
son ct al;
1856 same vs. Same5
1877 Stewart vs. Gem try
l8S Beafy VS. Clodfelter;
1873 Dunn W Kinder;
1f0 Railroad W DOnelson;
ii Livingston vs. Gas Ligh
Co;
142 Moore vs. Hughes;
l43 Gilman vs. wright;
IA Halle 4 Co vs. Bridge Co
145 Young vs. Snmmerhilh
adm r;
146 Brigham vs. Hays et al;
14T Bachus " Porter;
AS Goldburg W Insurance.
Co;
149 Smith VS. Bells ex'rs;
100 MsWhirter vs. Doug as;
Isl Lyle ct al vs. Bush;
132 MurreH vs. Corporation;
1913 Morgan & Co vs. Wick
houn;
i54 Hobbs & Co vs. stun;
1855 Livingston VS. Corpora
ton;
156 Lyle ct al rs Foster &
Co;
l5I Ensley " Vance;
I5s James vs. Smith;
i59 Kelly e al We Uverton Ell
al;
100 Lusk " Vance,
f6i Stratton vs Peck;
i62 SIu-e rs Davis;
leg Peek vs. Porterfield;
f64 takin s co Us Wetmore
Ct al;
l65 Waters vs. Ellis et a.;
Sd ~ eek.
100 Mayo 4 Co Yz Noel et al;
l6I Carter - Foster ct az;
los Yannoy " Beaumont
i69 Pc way vs. McRoberts;
10 Bedford W lawrence ct
al
III Rumsey vs. Hamblin;
liz Fuller vs. Wutmore et al,
ff5 Anderson " Smiley e. a,
Ia Mari " Davis,
40 hank ~ Demumbrane ct
a.;
10 Sane " Goss;
TIT
BY DA'
Nashville, Soy. fe-dow8t.