New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1872-03-12
THE COURTS.

against W. B. Brodie. which verdict
affirmed that the plaintiffs were solely
entitled to use the 'Open slot in the
manufacture of cotton ties, and was rem
dered in favor OF the plaintiff. who sued
the defendant for infringement of the
arrow tie patent. suits have now been
entered against all the cotton tie dealers in
the city, bringing suit by bill in chancery,
for an injunction. Cook is the inventor Of
the tie which it is claimed has been in
fringed.
The bill goes on to say in each case that
the defendant has infringed and is infring-
ing on the patent Of Cook which had been
purchased by McCOmb. The Injunction
asked for restains each defendant from
making, constructing, and using or vending
to others to be used any metallic ties for
cotton bales consisting or employing the
improvement specified (the slotl, and that
the infringing ties now in possession or
under the control of the defendants may
be delivered up to your orators to be de-
stroyed." Interrogatories are prOpounded
touching the sale, make or use by the par
ties of the aforesaid ties. Mr.. William
Chambers, George NOrten ct ais, Frede-
rick B. and Frederick Ernst. John Fl. Wal
lis, Andrew Stewart ct ais. are the parties
sought to be enjOiued.
A rule has been taken on Carhart. Ellis
& Clark in their case against Davis q
jackson to show cause why they should
not at once pay the marshal his disburse-
ments, or ON refusal he be permitted to
withdraw his keepers and release the
property. The rule is returnable on the
fifteenth instant.
The steamboat Hunter, Charles Fagot,
master, plying between the city and Guaran-
tine. has been libeled by the United States,
for the reason that in a late voyage made
to Fort jackson from the city the failure to
keep record as the law requires of the
number of passengers. the penalty of which
failure is one hundred dollars, and that,
having capacity according to inspection
of carrying fifteen passengers, she took on
board eighty-tive the penalty of which is a
refunding OF the passage money and fine
of ten dollars for each passenger.
Eliza w. Latham VS.. Daniel Hicky.-
Tried for the fourth time before the United
States Circuit Court This case was brought
20 enforce contract OF sale OF plaintiff S
succession rights in the SUGGESTIONS of her
grand parents, made in 1861 to defendant.
The Jury brought in a verdict for plaintiff
for the amount claimed in the petition,
,O2l rs, with eight per cent interest
from October 20. 1859.
This case had excited considerable inter
est, as a new trial was applied for and re-
cluded TO grant a new trial, resulting as
above. The new trial had been refused. the
Judgment of the court signed and a writ OF
error to act as a supersedeas lad been
granted.
The case of Alexander Walker vs. the
CITY OF New Orleans came mp yesterday
before Judge Cooley. Mr.. Walker claims
money due for professional services in de
Tending the drainage commissioners N suits
against Benjamin Bloomfield. drainage
commissioner, and the New Orleans and
shin Island Canal Company. The charte.
of the latter. granted by an act of the Leg
islature passed in 1869. abolished the board
of drainage commissioners, and all the as
sets, privileges, etc, were ordered N salt
act to he transferred to Benjamin Bloom
field. the drainage commissioner N 1907
which gave rise to numerous suits.
A merchant of New Orleans has entered
suit in the Fifth District Court against {
firm alleged to have their domiclle III th'
State of Massachusetts, but represented il
New Orleans. claiming $4,000 as DANA ge
arising from false arrest and imprisonment
at the instigation of defendants, who. being
plaintiffs creditors. caused him to be ar
rested and imprisoned oa the pretext tina
he was about to depart from the State VIII
intent to defraud them of their just dues.
In the Seventh District Court, some day:
ago. applications were made by three busI
ness firms of the city TO obtain wr-ts O
arrest against the person OF fourth nler
chant who was alleged to be indebted t.
them for merchandise purchased from them
and against whom they lodged the inform.
ton that he was about to leave the city
with evident intention TO defraud his cred
itors. The writs We're issued but subse
uuently set aside by Judge Collens, an,
now the defendant comes into court. claim
ing from his alleged prosecutors S2v,0n
| eNch for damage ges inflicted to his credit an'
| BUSINESS. He states that when the cred
itors came around to collect their bills the.
were armed and demanded his money \.
presenting several pistols and threaten.n
| TO shoot him.
Judge Theard has issued the toliowin
order of court, which will be found OF gen
eral interest to the bar:
! mo orders for writs OF provisional sei7
! ure. sequestration. arrest, attachment o
| Injunction will be granted by this cour
| after 3 p. NJ.
| His honor stated from the bench that in III
opinion this order was called for as mean
| to prevent, in many instances. iDJust.c
| being done to defendants. For instance
| plaintiff obtains writ of attachment O
seauestration at five o'clock on Saturda
! evening against a steamboat about to d'
| part on her regular trip At that hour tn
courts have adjourned. and conseluenti
| the boat must remain over until the nes
| Monday, before her owner can file motto
to bond. This entails expense and annoy
ance, and for this reason the party Obtain
| ing the writ frequently expects to hav
| his claim satisfied. reasoning that even a
unjust demand will be satisfied to avoid th
delay and loss of time and money whic
would otherwise ensue. In many case
| gross Injustice is done. and the court holC
! that there should be no good and vali
reason why the creditor should not obtal
his writ in good time to allow all defen'
ants ample opportunity to enter bond tt
same day.
1t is anticipated the suits by the widow
of the deceased Mr.. Wheyland will |
transferred 70 the Second District Court
supreme Court Decisions.
This tribunal met yesterday, and the ic
lowing decisions were rendered:
JUDGMENTS AFFIRMED.
Edward Phillips vs.. Charles ID. Steway
Judgment il favor of plaintiff.
Soyan Berhl VS.. G.. G. Fisk, district a
| torney.
| Carroll, Hoy & Co. vs.. Ann C. Mannir
and her husband.
! J. j. Wade vs.. G.. G.. Percy ct al
Eugene Bocaux ct al VS.. same and NJ
| Call.
Turcy Deschantels VS.. Carlos L. Robi
son. Judgment for defendant.
Benjamin Cooper VS.. the police jury
Rapides, Judgment for defendant.
| Charles Latitte ct AL VS.. Mrs. M.
Daigre ct al.
Mrs. A. Burnett vs.. 3. B. Cleaneay, 7. :
without intervenor.
B. Thornhill ct al. vs.. Picard & Well
Ordered that the judgment appealed fro
be increased by adding to the amount ther
of the further sum Of S2i2 80, and that d
PENDANTS pay all costs.
Succession of Charles Kock-Oppositic
to account Of testamentary executor.