Clarksville weekly chronicle. (Clarksville, Tenn.) 1873-1890, 1880-02-28
Proceedings Of the Chancery COurt

AT n GNEMAAEy AeEAA, lSbUs
Wall VS. Wall. Confirming report Of sale,
and ordering deed to purchaser.
johnson VS. Gill. Overriding demurrer.
Quarles VS. Manson. Order of reference.
EdIin VS. Foust. Sustaining demurrer in
part and leave to file amended bill.
Robb & Conrad VS. Jones. Order Of refer
ence.
Montgomery Co. VS. oneal. Cause dis
missed.
Herndon VS. Johnson. Cause dismissed.
Northington VS. Manning. Cause dis
missed at cost of compl't.
Morgan VS. Bryan. Confirming report on
compensation of admir-. and fee of guardian
ad Item.
Pope VS. Alwell. Appointing guardian ad
Item.
Pope VS.. Ely. Appointing guardian ad
Item.
Lurton VS. Whitfield Pro coufesso.
Howell VS. Howell. Final decree.
Brown VS. Hagood. Pro congesso,
Elder vs. Elder. Order of revivor.
Harrison VS. Harrison. Final decree.
Hume VS. Hume. Decree for sale.
Smith VS. Rawlings. Decree for sale.
Oneal VS. Jackson. Cause dismissed.
Lurton VS. Black. Confirming report of
C. & M.
shaclzelford VS. Harrell. Reviving former
orders.
Peacock VS. Williams. Confirming report
of sale.
| Ussery VS. Outlaw. Final decree.
/ Merritt VS. Porter. Final decree.
| Carpenter, Anear & Co. VS. Andrewartha
& Co. Order Of reference.
Parry VS. Norris Final decree.
Johns VS. Morris. Final decree.
West VS. Weaver. Ordering deed to Dun
l bar.
Caldwell VS. Dixon. Ordering sale of lands
sold to Trotter.
McNeilly VS. McNeilly. Pro copfesso.
McNeilly VS. McNeilly. Final decree.
West VS. Weaver. Ordering scire facias TO
Lewis ct ais.
Hackney VS. McKoin. Giving judgment
and ordering sale.
Yancey VS. Yancey. Giving judgment and
| ordering sale.
Shannon VS. Ussery. Allowing complt. to
replevy property.
| Caldwell VS. Dixon. Ordering land bought
Holt VS. Holt. Final decree.
Goodlett VS. Allen. Pro confesso.
| Morgan VS. Bryan. Settlement with adj
min'r.
Tinsley VS. Crockett. Cause dismissed.
Cooke & Co. VS. Porter ct al. Giving judg-
ment.
Mitchell, Louis & Co. VS. Daniel & John
son. Order allowing and oveF-ruling mo-
ton.
Turner, Hooper ct ais. VS. GAINESVILLE Co
operative NJ. Co. Ordering circuit court
cost paid.
Caldwell VS. Dixon. Transferring bids to
Massie & wife VS. Jordan. Order to pay at
TVS fees.
Nahm VS. Major. Overriding motion to
dismiss.
Tate VS. Tyler. Order of reference.
Manson VS. HARRISON. Declaring lien for
att'y's fees.
Tilly VS. Grant. Allowing time to an
swer.
Darden VS. Neblett. Cause continued and
taxing cost. -
Beaumont VS. Beaumont. Confirming ac-
count with exec'r.
Bailey VS. Powers. Order for alias process.
Martin VS. Martin. Order to pay Lurton.
Irwin VS. McKoin. Pro confesso.
Whit VS. Sutcliff & Carter. Bill dismissed.
Ussery VS. Outlaw. Report of Sheriff con-
firmed.
Smith VS.. Anderson. Ordering sale.
Mcclure VS. Mcclure. Confirming report
OF C. & NJ.
Smith VS. Halyard. Ordering title to BucG
& Morrow.
Anderson VS. Moseley. Allowing time to
answer.
Outlaw VS. Outlaw. Decree of revivor, pro |
confesso and order of sale.
RoIUD0aO We zapapfOn RfIl dicuafecod
Smith VS. Frech. Confirming report of
sale.
White VS. Branch. Order for report
Merritt VS. Porter Order reforming deed. |
Gardner VS. Grant. Report of sale con-
frmed.
Davie VS. Cornell. Ordering fund paid 10 I
guardian.
Elder VS. Daniel. Decree for sale.
Smith VS. Halyard. Decree for title.
Robb & Conrad VS. Jones. Decree for title.
Meurer VS. Wolf. Decree giving appeal.
Roberts VS. Million. Appointing guardian
ad htem and pro confesso.
Allsbrook VS. Gill. Decree for sale.
Lewis VS. Haynes. Decree for sale.
Dick VS. Pettus. Order for account.
Lndley VS. Lindley. Appointing guard
ian ad litem
Bailey VS. Burchett. Bill dismissed at de-
fendant's cost.
Roberts VS. Williams. Final decree and |
order for sale.
Johnson VS. Munford. Order to loan out
500.
johnson VS. Smith. Confirming report of |
Spec. Com. and order of sale.
Haynes VS. johnson. Final decree.
Tinsley VS. Muir. Final decree.
Williams VS. Dorteh. Giving judgment |
and ordering special com. to pay in fund.
Pickering VS. Elliott. Appointing guard |
ian ad litem.
Goodlett VS. Terrell. Allowing amended
bill to be filed.
Lewis VS. Haynes. Discharge in bankrupt
cy filed.
School district No. 20 VS. Powers. Allow
ing amendment of bill.
!. Shelby VS. Buck. Diminishing original bill |
and ordering sale under cross bill.
Whitfield VS. Whitfield. Decree for di-
vorce.
Irwin VS. McKoin. Decree for sale.
Shelton VS. Outlaw. Judgment VS. sheriff
of Dickson county.
Meurer VS. Wolf Final decree.
Pickering VS. Elliott. Order of reference.
School dist. No. 20 VS. Powers Pro con-
fesso.
Bruce VS. Bruce. Bill dismissed.
johnson VS. Prouty. Confirming report of
sale, and awarding writ of possession
Pollard VS. Whitfield. Final decree.
State of Tenn. VS. Tenn. orphan Asylum.
Pro confesso.
Collins VS. Lyle. Pro confesso and order
ing sale of land.
Pollard, Pettus & Co. VS. johnson. Con-
firming sale.
Trammill VS. Trammill. Cause continued
Peacher VS. Peacher. Confirming sale.
Merritt & Fort VS. Towards heirs. Reviv-
ing judgment.
Settle VS. Allensworth. Allowing answer
10 be fled.
Merritt & Fort VS. Shackelford. Reviving
Judgment.
Ednn VS. Edlin. Confirming report of
sale.
The Clerk & Master, at his own request, re-
lewed his official bonds, giving new bonds
n the sum of 65OOO, which were approved J
md accepted by the court and spread upon
he minutes.
Elders Opera House. !