Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1872-05-23
First Circuit COura-HeislelI. Judge

NNeAEd-AAeh8kekAs 1uuSe.
The following calendar is far to-day.
Yesterdays was all disposed of: 526.
Briggs & Peterson VS. Finney; 674, Tay-
lor VS. Nathan; S39, PattesOn VS. Black,
Cameron & Co.; 973, Cicalla, admins
traitor, VS. Taylor ct al; 9S5, Griffin VS.
Block; 1885, Smith VS. Thorpe; 1904,
Flaherty VS. Sullivan; l1S1, COnneIl VS.
Donohue; 1l96, McKinervy VS. Giles;
1913, Block VS. Winchester ct al; 1919,
Dunlap d Childress VS. Dixon; 1920,
Garin VS. GeOghegan; 1892, Frank d
Thilman VS. Herzog; 1898, Tyler & Spen-
Ger VS. Hartledge; 1850, Heating VS.
Polk ct al; 125l, -Creamer VS. Cole;
1852, Walt VS. Spellman; 1860, Hubbard
VS. Kelly; 1861, Lane vs. Russell; 1884,
Andrews & Co. VS. Dean & Co.; 1885,
Stewart VS. Moore ct al; 1856, King VS.
AmmOns; 1887, State of Tennessee VS.
Dismukes; 1895, Flynn VS. Ford ct al !;
1897, Porter, administrative, VS. Mollitor;
1901, State of Tennessee, use, VS. Cara
way ct al; 1922, City of Memphis VS.
Allen; 1924, City of Memphis vs. Sci
bert; 1925, City of Memphis VS. SchOen-
feldt; 1888, Planters Insurance Compa-
ny VS. Jones. Bros. 1885, Jones VS. Fite;
1912, Harris, trustee, VS. Townsend,
trustee; 1343, Brown VS. Haynes & Co. I;
1851, Hartz VS. Ferling; 1859, Dobbert
& Co. VS. Burning & Griffin; 1860, To-
meney VS. Bingham ct al; 1861, Gallo
way VS. Woodruff & Co.; 1866, StOvall
& Laird VS. Vance; 1875, Goodman
q Holmes vs. Tomeny; 1876, Ferguson
vs. Etna Life Insurance Company; I;
1873, Williams VS. DOnnell; 1880, Par
ham & Walker VS. Sterns; 1882, Trigal-
leZ VS. City of Memphis; 1888, Goodhue,
use, VS. Page, jr-, ct al; 1884, GOOdhue,
use, VS. Page, jr., ct al; 1887, lien VS.
Levy; 1890, len VS. SchlOss; 1894. Mis-
sissippi River Railroad Company VS.
Simmons; 1895, State of Tennessee VS.
Knox ct al; 1897, App VS. Memphis Ger
man Savings Institution; 1899, Hanks,
Porter & Co. VS. Merriman. admr; 1905,
Benswanger vs. lStQrm; fO6, Memphis
German Savings Institution VS. Rhein-
hardt; l412, Reeves VS. Lanier; 1916.
Ashe VS. Jewell; 14l6, Curry & Co. VS.
Bingham ct al; 141S, Connell, jr., admr,
VS. Beckhard ct al; 1920, Cole VS. Hodges;
1872, Miller, admir- VS. Williams, extr;
l424, Strong VS. NJ. and L. r. r. r. Co;
1925, Rowan VS. Higgins, administrative:
1929, Massuran VS. MussO, jr.; 1888, Har-
bert, ct al, VS. the city of Memphis; 1884,
Southern Express Company vs. Selden:
1875, Bretzman VS. st. Louis Packet
Company; 1887, Doherty vs. Wright:
1440, Cochran VS. Proudft; 144l, Pyne
VS. Banks, ct al; 1443, Jones VS. Brown &
Co.; 1445, Carson VS. Memphis Street
Car Company; l447, Anderson VS. Nc
Arver; l44S, Hill VS. Payne, ct al; 1852.
McLemore, use, VS. McLemore; 1855,
Williams VS. Mallory; l456, Dixon, use,
VS. Waldran, ct al; 145S, Steiner, as
signee, VS. GoOdhar & GilIiland; 1859.
Memphis Gayoso Gas Companyvs VS. Win
ters; 1850, Folk VS. Hardin; 1852, Ma
lone, Administrative, VS. City of Mem
phis; 1476, Mosby VS. Crowley; 1881,
Robertson VS. Lanier, ct al; 14S2,
Roper Bro. VS. Dickinson, Williams &
Co.; 1893, Heathman VS. Dixon;
1494, SchayeF VS. Dickinson; 1897,
Haly VS. Stein; 1899, Farris VS. Life
Association of America; 1901, Brewer VS.
Williams; 1902, McCaun VS. Payne;
1903, Raggio VS. Ciealla, administrator;
1867, Soanlon VS. Simmons; 1915, White
VS. Hill, FOntaine & Co.; 1919, Sparks vs
Sherrell; 1922, Carter VS. Bragg; 1896,
Gallagher VS. Moore; 1891, Dickinson,
Williams & 90. VS. RoOtes, Vance & Co.
1886, Eiehberg, use, VS. Beehler; 1881, ,Sut-
on, Trigg d Co, VS. Warren & Co.; 1888,
Wright VS. Stoddard; 1912. Morgan VS.
Farfow 1914, West vs. Irby; 1916, Diggs
VS. Planters Insurance Company; I547,
Allen VS. Planters Insurance Company;
154S, Birch vs. Weld, administrator;
1873, State of Tennessee, use, VS. Ring
valid.