Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1869-06-22
LAW REPORTS.

LAW CoURT-H. 81. Lee, Judge.-The
calendar Of this Court set for yesterday
was entirely disposed of. The calendar
for to-day is as follows:
2O5f Taylor VS. Ellis.
2052 Robinson VS. Malstesta.
2053 Davis VS. League, Clerk, etc
2054 Maydwell VS. Jones.
2055 Crawford VS. League ct al.
2056 Price VS. Clarke.
1851 Edmonds VS. Cunningham.
205s Feldman vs. League, Clerk.
2O59 Hill & DOran VS. Williams.
2O6O Lewis VS. Pearson.
2O61 Brudar VS. Robinson.
2O62 Scales VS. Walsh.
2O63 Hessee 81 Levy vs. Steinkuhl.
2O64 Fleming VS. Landers.
2O65 Dixon vs. Cockrell.
2066 Ray VS. same.
2O67 Rollins vs. same.
DOGS DeROS VS. same.
2O69 James VS. same.
2070 Johnson VS. same.
2O7I Love VS. m
2072 Hill VS. same.
2O73 Cannon Us Cockrell.
2074 Anderson vs. same.
2O75 Hartly VS. Dockins.
2O76 Goldsty vs. Goldsty.
2O77 Vanalstein & Wing vs. MCDONALD e'
al.
2O7S Reese vs. Tieman.
2O79 Levy VS. Smith.
POSI- Lacy & MeGhec IS Beer.
2OS2 Hill vs. Bates.
| 2OS3 Moor VS. same.
20S4 Walsh VS. same.
2Os5 Bell VS. Waldran, admir-.
1886 Falwell VS. Watson
20S7 Naecaro vs. League ct al.
2Oss Lyon & Aughe VS. same.
| pose Panisi VS. Hubbard.
2O9O Cohen vs. Steiner Bros. q
| oOor C.L.14~ 20 I nell
2G02 Williams, Cartmell 4 Go vs. Loague
ct al.
2O93 Prewett vs. Bias.
2O94 Hallum VS. same.
1905 SeesseI * Son VS. League Ct al
2O96 Lelievre vs. Cogswell.
2097 Elan VS. Simpson.
2OgS Hill & Co VS. Deane Il Wayne
20g9 Richards vs. NJ & ofM.
200 Harris, eX'x, vs. McDermott.
MUNICIPAL CoCRT.-G. ". HdtdTGa,
,Btdge,-No business of importance was
transacted in this Cou yesterday. To-
dav the motion docket will be called, and
ali motions properly entered will be
heard and determined. Writs Of inquiry
will also be executed. The criminal side
of the June term will commence W ednes-
day.
CTRCUIF CoURT-G. ". ReeUeS, Judge
This Court was engaged all day yesterday
in hearing the evidence in the case o
Dempsey Weaver, trustee, - Robinson
& Jones, To-day the argument Will com-
mence and win probably consume the
entire day.
CRIMINAL CoERT.-Henry p. Hudson
appeared in Court yesterday morn
ing. and upon being qualified, tool
his seat upon the Bench. The bust
ness before the Court was then pr0ceede,
with. but very little was accomplished
4 nolle prosequi was entesRd in three o
four cases. To-day the regular calenda
will be taken up.
CHANCERY CoURr-Wm. IT, Smith
G~dHceLiOr.-The following cases are spe
cially set for to-day, on pleas, demurrers
etc, to-Wjt:
Bear w Schwarzenburg.
Warnecke VS. Larko.
! Wallace vs. Hayes.
Spiers VS. JOeresS.
Christian vs. Megibben.
: Johnson vs. Beaumont.
Apperson vs. TrottPr
MeGSee vs. Block.
y White vs. Watson,
. Provine VS. Stewart.
CuneO vs. GalliuO.
> Jones VS. Walker.
Jameson VS.. Elder.
Jones VS. Walker Bros.
Mosby vs. Elaherty,
Harris, Cochran & Co vs. MoshN.
; Lanier VS. GayOsO.
Cordona vs. Metropolitan Police.
= Georgetti vs. Beaumont.
Malatesta VS. Beaumont
= PhiPps Us Same.
Slagle vs. Same.
: Dohm vs. BurdiJt,
i Sweet vs. Finnic.
TAYLOR VS. Dow.
Same vs. Ford.
Same vs. CuneO.
Same vs. TrOgli0.
/ Same VS. Flaherty.
ID Same VS. Munson.
: Same VS. HightOwcr.
Same vs. Woodward.
Same VS. Evans.
DEGREES fIN yesterday;
IS Morrison vs. Foley, injunction dissolve
Davis VS. StOvall, report confirmed,
h Williams vs. Bradley, final.
Drake vs. Mclean, demurrer Sustaine
BOYD VS. Levy, sale.
OverUOn vs. Johnson, final.
Brinklev vs. Hopkins, report conbrine