The aegis & intelligencer. [volume] (Bel Air, Md.) 1864-1923, 1868-11-20
The Circuit Court.

Jury, after session Of six days, the finding
of eighteen bills Of Indictment, and visiting
the Aims House and County Jail, were finally
discharged, on Saturday last, with the thanks
of the Court for their promptness and cor
rectness in disposing of the business Of the
county. In addition to our report Of the
proceedings last week, the following had
taken place up to The time of the close of this
report: 7E laa.L
Jacob Gerwiek VS.. John Gussman action
on the case; entered of: Farnandis for
plaintiff, 8. Archer for defendant. ~
State, use ofthe County Commissioners, vs..
Standiford and others action of debt
Judgment by default. Thomas for plaintiff,
no appearance for defendants ,'-
Stephen N. Falls, procian ami of Rebecca
knight, VS.. Chas. Knight and wife +; action
on the case judgment for plaintiff for costs.
S. Archer for plaintiff, Maynadierfor defend
ants .'t4t
Carl Erdman VS.. Samuel NJ Column az
ton of replevin judgment for plaintiff for
the property, and one cent damages and
costs. Jarrett for plaintiff, no appearance for
defendant. .E9a 'som stJ as.i
jeremiah McIlvain VS. Robert T Scarbo-
rough action on the csse Judgment by de-
fault. jarrett for plaintiff, no appearance for
Courtney and wife, use Of Hinield Il.
Courtney, VS.. John II. Baker; action on the
case Judgment on terms to be filed. II. W.
Archer for plaintiffs, Gilbert for defendant.
John Matson VS.. West Bangor Slate
Mining Company; action on the case judg-
ment by consent. Stump and Maynadier for
plaintiff, 9 Archer and jarrett for defend.
ants. .tH'a
Edward Ru,ledge vs.. WIN. E, Poteet /; ac-
tion of replevin entered agreed per order
filed. H. W. Archer for plaintiff, Farnandis
and Jarrett for defendant ''1'>7 30
jas b. Groom, administrator OF John c.
Groom, VS.. Singleton and Preston action on
the case entered of by order Of plaintiffs
counsel. FL. w. Archer for plaintiff, no ap-
pearance for defendants af as
d. M. Sprogle VS.. Thomas F. Jones ac-
ton on the case (; Judgment with leave to OK.
ecute 2 writ Of enquiry. H. " Archer for
plaintiff, no appearance for defendant. Il
John Riley Va. Edward ISeithly, actonson
the case; entered off by order of plaintif's
attorney H. W. Archer for plaintiff, 40 APP
pearance for defendant D''
VIM. p. Wcth Grill VS. Isaac Meehem ac-
lion on lie CAST; Judgment by default. s.
Archer and Nan Bibbcr for plaintiff, no ap-
pearance for defendant e - 'ai ~
A. J, Prigg vs.. VIM. H. Roberts action
on the case; entered agreed. Jarrett for
plaintiff, Galloway for defendant. - I.
J. u. STREET. VS.. j. B. Kelly; action on the
case Judgment confessed. Streettfor plain
tiff, Galloway for defendant. ~ 'ai
j. NJ. Watts vs. J..Warner action on the
case entered of, -- .------ for plain
tiff, no appearance for defendant,
Jas. T. Knight VS.. Thos. j. Landen ac-
tion Of replevin; removed to Cecil county on
affidavit of defendant H. W. Archer and
Farnandis for plaintiff, s. Archer and jarrett
for defendant g'.fTg.
Thos. j, Lamden va james 4. Knight !;
action of rcpleyin removed to Cecil county
on the affidavit Of the plaintiff s. Archer
and Jarrett for plaintiff, H. W. Archer and
Farnandis for defendant.
Ezekiel Moultoq VS. John w. Carroll &C
tion Of ejec;mept; Judgment nj 81. Gallo
way for plaintiff, no appearance for defend
ant. ea gs1lN '- 3di elEli -sagia
Joseph NJ. Sire. tt vs. Henry Ball and HI
ram Ball action on The case; judgment on
terms filed. Street, and Gittings for plain
tiff, s. Archer for defendants. sf NC
Kimberly and Moorehead VS.. Elisha
England action on the case; entered off by
order Of plaintiffs attorney. s. Archer and
Van Bibber for plaintiffs, no appearance for
defendant, ssg ~ 4. aotre.r r,
james Warden vs.. Mary Ann Anderson
and others; action on the case entered of
by order of plaintiffs attorney. Richardson
for plaintiff. no appearance for defendants
James Warden VS.. Joel Austin; action on
the case; entered off by order Of plaintiffs
attorney. Richardson for plaintiff, no APP
pearance for defendant 5aai smea Is lea
Nicholas Hutchins W Hamilton Lefevrc
r. No. Il
and Sarah Jane his wifi, and Eenj Crommelli
in equity. In this case the complainant
bill prayed for sniniunctiop andthe appoint
Inent offs receiver The court granted thu
injunction, with leave 70 The defendants tt
move to dissolve, afterfivo day . notice to The
complainant. and set down the application
for receiver for hearing. At the hearing
the court dissolved the injunction, refu
sed to appoint a receiver aud dismissed thu
bill of complaint. From the action Of thu
Circuit Court the complainant has appealed
and the whole matter now goes to tho Cour
ofAppcals for its action. Stump and May
nader for complainant. Fl, w. Archer, A. Ii
Jarrett and Galloway for defendants.
Hamilton Lefevre VS.. Amelia Crommelli
appeal judgment below in favor ofappel
Ice Judgment reversed and Judgment for ap
pellant for costs. H. w. Archer, Galloway
and A. II. Jarrett FOR appellant. Stump and
Maynadier for appellee. srs,sr
BENZ. Crommell vs. Hamilton bcfevre ap
peal; continued 10 the next term, on motion
of the appellant, Stump and Maynadier fol
appellant, H. vi. Archer. Galloway and Al
II. jarrett for appellee. r l. w
LAND SALE II s, Richardson, auctioncei