Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1880-10-06
LEGAL LORE.
Meeting OF the State Supreme COURT for
tho October acknowledgement of

The supreme court for the State met ct -
ID. yesterday for its October term at the capt.
tol, Chief Justice Gilfllan, end Associates
Berry and Cornell. Clerk 8. Fl. Nichols, and q
large representation of the leading lawyers of
the State, being in attendance The court
opened after the ancient and stereotyped form.
| and the chief justice proceeded TO call the
causes on the calendar, 10l in number, which
were assigned for hearing as follows:
CALENDAR ASSIGNMENTS.
Place Bass, Sppellsnt, VS.. Oliver Anderson and E.
7. B. Bagge, respondents. Continued
Alexander j. Mcdonald, sole surviving partner of
Alexander j. Mcdonald and John Z. Mcdonald.
partners as Mcdonald Brothers, appellants, va the
Minneapolis Lumber company reapon1ants Con
tinued.
saie Campbell, plaintiff in error w. State of Min.
nesos' defendant In error October 81.
Kate johnson, plaintiff in error, State of Min
nesota defendant in error. October At
Nettie Connolly, plaintiff in error, vs. State of
minnesota, defeodant in error October 81.
William F. Davidson, appellant, VS.. James D.
Beals, respondent October 81.
S. D. Hanback,, appellant, We. W. s. Douglas, re =
spondent. Passed.
Lyman Bros, appellants, vs.. W 8. Douglas, re-
William s. Hoyt John jacobson and BENJAMIN
Dobel, appellants, vs.. W. W. Bradeu, the town Of
Canton, county Of Fillmore, and the Caledonia Mis-
N ovember 10.
State Of Minnesota, plaintiff, vs. Henry LOOMS,
defendant; October %.
lngmundson County Treasurer, plaintiff, VS.
George baird, defendant; passed.
John 5 Prince and Horatio Houiton, REALTORS
VS. The Minneapolis Mill company, respondent: sat,
tied. ~
The City of st Paul, respondent, vs. Franz, Smith
relator; to be submitted on briefs.
Catharine Keller, respondent, VS. the Sioux City
and st Paul Railroad company, appellant; October
In the matter Of the application for iudpernent
against lots and 9, In block 2l2 in Nelson's addi
ton to the city of minneapolis for taxes of 1878.
thereon, Brotherhood of the Church of Gethsenane
defendant; November5 s.
In the matter OF the proceedings to enforce pay-
ment of the taxes on real estate remaining DELINQUENT
on the first day of June 1877 for the comfy of Hon
nepin. State of Minnesota, Thomas L. Grace. as to
lots g. 4. g. and T. in block 8, Bottineau's addi-
ton to St. Anthony, defendant; November5
The State of Minnesota, Respondent vs Frederick
@. Riebe. appellant October 49,
Jesse Farley, appellant, VS. Norman W Kttson,
James Hill and the st Paul, Minneapolis & Mantto-
ba railroad company, respondents; Octocer 6.
Jesse Farley, respondent, vs Norman W Kittson
James Hill the st Paul, Minneapolis & Manitoba
railroad company appellants; October 6.
Daniel Libby, respondent VS. Christian Mkkel-
berg, appellant; October 26.
G Wheaton, @ Reynolds and Wilcox part
ners as Wheaton, Reynolds j. Co, appellants vs. VII
liam wheeler and R Wagner, respondents; No
yember IL,
William W Holcombe appellant, VS. John John
son, respondent; November 8.
Robert DeaBin, respondent, VS. the Chicago, MIL
waukee l. st Paul railway company, appellant; No
vembeI y.
Mary Cannsdy, respondent, VS. Matthew Lynch
and Lydia Lynch. appellants; December 1.
Frederick Boetcher, respondent, Va Charles Sts-
ples appel ant; November 8
Peter Smith, respondent, VS.. D Todd, Charles
Haven, R Leavitt Josiah Leavt and Augustus
Howe, copartners as Todd, Haven, Leavltt & Co,
Charles Allen, Charles Willis ard Robert Hal
Charles Allen and Charles L Willis, appellants; mo-
ton to dismiss the appeal; October 6.
James McPhee, respondent, VS. Isaac Staples, ap-
pellant; November 8.
enfield, respondent, James Wheeler and
Henry, I'll =. heeler, co-partners as Wheeler Bros,
Ralph Wheeler. appellants; November 8.
Sarah Butler, appel ant, VS. The Trustees of the
First Presbyterian Church OF Minneapolis, etc. re-
spon tents; November IL.
Sanford Hooper, appellant, va James Webb
A Irwin, William Weible, Michael Gates VIII
Ii IN Henry and Smythe & Farrell res pondents; Oc-
tober 49,
william L Howe, appellant, VS. William R Hender-
son, respondent; October %.
Edison l. Davis, Appellant, v5 Luther Hudson
and Mary H1dson October 10.
Sally Destroyer, appellant VS. Mary Jordan, ct al,
respondents; October l3.
The First National bank OF ST. Paul apnellant va
Henry Nathan s A Hooper and Daniel i, How re-
spondents; continued.
The Minneapolis Harvester Works, appellant VS.
Matthias Haley respondent; October %.
Henry Felters, respondent, VS. Henry Baich and
Foster L Balch. appellants; November 10.
Leopold Abrahams and Marx Abrahams, respond
Kuud Q sollund, respondent, VS. z Johnson, ap
pellant; Octobsr 20.
Filing Isaacson, respondent, vs The Minneapolis
L st Louis Railway company and White-the
Minneapolis q st Louis Railway company, appellant
October 30.
George Lyman and Fred " Lyman, appellants,
vs Rasmussen and Nelson, associated and doing
business under the said name, respondents; Octo-
Der 20.
Mary Als, respondent VS. Edward Ware and
James Davidson, appellants November 10.
r, DODGE and
William Davidson aud others defendants and
Lorenzo Allis and Mary Als, his wife, appellants
November 10.
Charles Nelson George R Finch and Albert
scheffer, executors OF Charles Scheer deceased ct
ais respondents, Emil Munich, Gustave Nuncb.
Adolph Munich and Adam Sterle. appellants; Ooto-
Der Is.
Wells, appellant, VS. William Geiseke. ct al, re-
spondents; October 25.
aeser Threshing Machine company, respondent,
vs. D Farmer, ct al, appellants; October IS.
Nellie W Folansbee, respondent, VS. amanda
Menuge, Louis Menuge and Johnson-O W
Johneon, appellant; November 10.
George Warner, ct al, respondents vs. George
Gruber, appellant; motion to affirm notice of appeal
October 6.
Hiram Berkey, respondent, VS. Mary Ann Judd.
James NJ Gaskell and Arid Eldredge executors of
the last will and testament of George Judd, de-
ceased, appellants; November II.
In the matter Of the estate of George B Judd de-
ceased on the appeal of Hiram Berkey from the pro-
bate court OF said county, appeal of Mary Ann Judd
executor, ETC., from the order OF district court
Washington county, in favor Of Hiram Berkey, re-
spondent; November Il.
Amanda Turnbull, respondent, VS. Herman 5chroe-
der, appellant; November q.
Calvin a Rumrill and Calista Rumriu, by Andrew
Palmer, Jr, their guardian ad Item, and George N,
Rumril appellants, VI First National Bank, st AL
bans, Vermont, Edgar Keller and A johnson
respondents; continued.
William Sears, appellant, va Christ Wempner and
William Stahman, respondent; November ~.
Francis Huot, respondent, vs. Henry Weis, Gustaf
Weis and John Starr, appellants; November "a
Charles Sutton, respondent, VS. Henry D Wood
appellant: November "A
Wesley Neill respondent, vs. J Wallace Field and
w Aldrich, appellants; motion to dism iEs Oct. 6
Sherman P. Terryl, appellant, vs. Samuel Bailey
respondent; October IL.
Christopher Carl, respondent, VS. Esaias Rhener,
appellant; October 81.
Horace Vermilyer, appellant, James Foran and
D Kemp, respondents; October II.
Michael Sennett, respondent vs. John Shehan, ap-
pesnt: October "a.
John Shehsn, respondent, VS. Michael Sennett, ap-
pelant; October Il.
Luther Weld. appellant vs Minnie Weld re-
spondsnt; OCTOBER 90
L Porter, respondent vs. Martin Chandler ap-
pellant; October 20.
John Robson, respondent, VS. Conrad Bohn, appel
liant; November 10.
Joel LaDkton, respondent, vs. Andrew Lamo-
reaux, ct al, appe liant; October Is.
Ada Matilda Pickett. appellant VS. Rufus Seymour
Pickett, respondent; October IL.
Pettingil, respondent, VS. Ignatius Donnelly
appellant October 81.
William Mulcahy, respondent, vs. II Florer
appellant, November 49,
William Nlulcahy, appellant, vs. II Florer, re-
spondent; November IL
Jesse Sumner, ct al, appellants, vs. William Jones
and another, respondents; October 20.
Nhr,IQ Aro p,rL,