Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1867-11-19
THE C0URTS.

CIRCUIT CoURr, chez J.st,cs ,Car,t,r-Yes.
tefoay at The conclusion Of Mr.. Fullsr's argu-
%sn. IN ne case OF simpson ana Eaton VS..
to the jury on his prayers. After the charge
10 the jury by Justice GARTER, they gave jud g-
ment for the plaintiff In SUN OF ,7a) with in :
teIests from January ls', 1885,
Murphy VS. 6oodine; messrs. Brent aud
Philips: file order 10 dismiss; dismissed by de-
feposnt. Kelly VS.. Wcrch, appellee, by Mr.
Schmidt: files exceptions to JUDGMENT of Court
and prays an appeal to General Term. Adams
VS.. Philip q Solomon: leave to amend mar
Wallach VS.. Mcdonnell & Herbert; judgment
for plaintiff O'Briea VS.. Dogherty; appeal
ordered 10 be docketed and dismissed, on mo-
below affirmed. Pitkins 20. vs. SIIas
BOY &c; judgment by default made final by Mr..
Fendali. Taylor and Davis VS.. Lantell Iudg-
ment made final W. H. Bureh VS.. Cook
Judgment made final. State Bauk of New
York vs.. X. J. Walker; Judgment by default
stricken out and issue joined.
In case of H. o. ID. Baaks Co. VS.. Barney
O. Major. Mattingly tor plaintiff and Thomp-
son for defendant. Mr.. Thompson pleaded
nni til record, and denied that Mattingly had
right 70 demur TO an issuabie plea, and asked
that demurrer be overruled. Court said it
was special demurrer and was we'll taken,
and he sustained II, but MI Thompson might
traverse the " hoIe plea and deny that he was
the man that Judgment was rendered against
At all. Court adjourned at p. m.
Tc-ddy-Ths jury was called and the case of
Ssldner Vs. Wilson taken up; Bradley for
plaintiff, and Darlington and Wilson for de.
PENDANT. This is an action to recover a store
was accustomed to purchase clothing from the
plaintIn; his TWO sons purchased clothing and
had II charged to their fathers account. The
father refuses to pay, and action is brought for
Mr.. bradley asked. as certain books were
missing, to withdraw Juror in order to have
the case postponed until he could send to Bal
timore for the book
Mr.. Darlington objected, and demanded a
verdict.
Mr.. Bradley said the question was, whether
the original credit was given to sons or father.
The account shows that there were articles for
the defendant and also for his sons and Mr..
Wilson, moreover, had requested plaintiff to
let his sons have these goods and he would
pay for them. They were furnished upon his
credit, and the charges were reasonable.
Mr.. Wilson.-Both young men were OF age.
and dwelt in domicIls separate from their
Mr.. Bradley is a statute OF Mary.
land authorizing the withdrawal of juror,
which obviates the doubt of your Honor as to
Pfeet VS.. Snaffieid: same vs. Abner; 252. 253
Mr.. Thompson asked for judgment by default,
with consent OF counsel. judgment for plain
TIL.
Strouse ct al vs. Hoover; Mr. Miller asked
for confirmation OF Judgment judgment con.
frmed
Meyenberg We. Walsh, No. 80 appeal docket;
MI. Phillips asked for continuance for an.
psllee; refused.
Stoneburner ct al. vs.. Folsom; Ju dgment con-
fessed, with stay Of execution for twenty DAYS.
MIR. Bradley--We would suffer q non suit, If
they would not plead the statute OF Limitation.
Court said they codld not plead il, as the stat
ute runs from the last item on the account.
Plead 1t, and plaintiff was non-suited at the
instance Of bic counsel.
Banks d 90. Major, $50: MT. Thompson
consented 20 judgment for plantitf; juig lent
Mount Vernon Company of Baltimore, Md,
vs. Fame Il Rarnes; the judgment was made
final on affidavit
National Bank of the Metropolis VS.. Bleigh
Daviuee and WIlson-Breut aud Merrick.
Jury sworn in this case, and Mr.. Wilson, for
the PLAINTIFF, SAID the declaT alton sets forth
he making of five certain acceptances, viz
One dated April 9th, &C. for g, 375, payabls Is
days after Gate, drawn by q. q Sprague on
CIRCUIT; next, April 9th, &c, by same on same,
" days after date. for Sl,2c0; next Hay 18th,
GO, 20 days, for -, SO. me same: MAY 18th,
SO, 80 days, for S716 a. same on same; May
18th, &c, 40 DAYS. for Si,275, by G.. u. Spragus
on j. +. Leonard. New York; on all OF which
Mr.. Bleigh's name appears as epdorser, and
suit Is brought against him as endorser and
owner Of note. Now, we expect to prove the
case by proving the signatures of the party,
and that the papers are IN possession OF Bank
for value. Witness for plaintiffs examined to
prove handwriting Of defendant. Defence is
usurv as Mr.. Beigh is an accommodation en-
dorser and never had any benefit from the
said drafts. The testimony taken in this case
consumed the rest Of the day until adjourn
ment.
No. 25S-Philip Plate VS.. Henry Knor Davis
and Grammer. 336-Daniel W. Curtis VS..
Geo. w. Theacker, Jones &c Ashford and Nor
ris. 346-Patrick Deeley VS., John Shauahan
ct al. Davis and Fendall, MerrIek and Eanis
74-Wm. H. and Henry q. Wyeth VS.. Hender-
son. Fowler, Brent and Philips and Cox Sc
Jas. T.. Highland ct al. VS.. Geo. Savage. Brent
and MerrIck, Cox. 296-Jas. ii. Stevens VS.
VIM. l.. Dawson, and Mattingly and Logan.
2a1-Nichols & Brannn VS.. Washington Gas
Light company Adams and Kennedy ana
Webb.
EQUITY COURT, Justice WylI.-Brown vs.
Beckett, decree dismissing bill. Young VS.
Goodrich, order appointing WIN. r Laselle
ORPHANS COURT, Judge PurceH-Fourth
account of Leonidas Coyle. Administrator Of
Andrew Coyle. deceased, WAS filed and APP
proved. Martha Ann TruxelI appointed
guardians Of the orphans Of Frances Ignatus
Truxell; bond. 81, 900. Thomas CaiIagan aud
james Carroll sureties. VIM. +. Mattingiy
solicitor.