Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1886-04-24
MUNICIPAL LITIGATION.
Parties Who Have Scught Damages 81
the City Within the Last
Ten Years.
Sowing the seeds Of Ezpeetaney and Beap-
ing an Abundanf Harvest q
Disnppointment-

lhaElAhMA NEtNAara AIAAAAAaAAH VIZ $500
3 grudge agtinst the corporation, By study
ing this report, which IS given below, can
discover the average mortality" az u
were, Of damage suits
POaT WORM, TEX, April ~, lss6.-To
the Honorable MGyor aud Common Com
eli Of the CITY Of Fort Worth GENIE
MEN-Pursuant % 4 resolution 81 your
honorable bOdy herewith submit 4 brief
report Of all eases that have been fled
against the city since TIE burning Of the
records In 1875, and Of the Litigation
now pending against the city.
The following cases have been fled
against the city IN the district court:
John T. Shelton ~. City, nled NOyem-
Der IL, 1877, suit for damages on account
OF erecting cala0OOse near PLAINTIFF
property. Dismissed ~ agreement Of
council 10 April, 1877, az cost Of city.
w. n. Davis vs. City, Sled April %,
issi This was an Injunction suit ~ the
plaintiff % prevent the city from collect
ing school tax. Decided adversely 20
city In October, 1881, the court sustain
ing the injunction.
W. A. Aaron vs. City, suit for dam
ages, on account Of removal u plaintiffs
wife aud child 70 pest-house. SIN pend
ing Ia district court.
L. w. Crawford W. City. died 10 1884.
for damages, on account Of city establish
Ing and maintaining burial place Tor
hlth and garbage near PLAINTIFFS resi-
dence Cause tried BY jury December &,
1888, resulting In 3 verdict for plaintf
for sls33, from which Judgment the city
appealed to the supreme court, judgment
reversed and new trial granted. Cause
tried again st the present term Of the dis
rict court, resulting in a verdict for the
city.
Gus Wemesley vs.. City, suit for dam
ages IN the sum Of $1,000 on account Of
iniuries sustained 5y plaintiff while at
work about the waleE-wOTks filed Angus.
-, 1855, and now pending 10 the district
court.
Maggie Harrison VS.. City and the
Water-Works, suit for damages IN the
sum Of 5s5 900 on account Ok death Of
plaintiffs inbstgtc while working a. the
wa,er-woYks, BY the ewing Of an embark.
ment. FILED July, 1856 suit stin pend
ing.
L. g. Kenn0n VS.. City, sult for 5000
damages Tor flooding plaintiffs iaHd
Filed August ~. less.
J. G. Bennett vs. city, Med Deem
Der &, 1855. suit for $1,000 damages %
plaintiffs house, alleged 10 nave been
susta.ued waile 10 the employ o. the cts
80 The water works, o. account 81 The
negligence % engineer or foreman Suit
still pending
:. 3. Borg ys City aud Missouri re.
ciLc railway company. Amount u dam.
ages ciaimld, d jt3J, Cause u actiop, il.-
iur.es alleged 70 have heau sustained by
defendants negligence ia leaving q stake
70 1intWay crossing the railroad SO tae
foo, % Maiu street Suil stil pcuding
City 81, 4. VI Bf.ti0n q AL, being tae
Nichols bond casgs, Med Nov 10, 1855
Amount sued i)r "a both auits, $40, s5s 49,
Silu pending.
JUSTICE AND COUNTY COURTS.
List u cases brought against the ciiy 10
Justice aud county courts, and cases E0w
pending.
John ,. Swayne vs.. City, suit Gled %
justice court Tor loss 81 plaintiffs cow
~ defendants negligence In leaving
trench open plaintiff obtained judgment
January 81 1885, Ia justice cOurt for 500,
from which judgment the city appealed
cause tried IN county court 81 February
term, 1855, resulting IN plaintiffs uoG-
snit and judgment iH favor Of city for
costs.
Thomas Melton vs.. City, suit for dam.
AaHH A0A AAI hAAliNA VI ElAlNAAAA AAE.
alleged 20 have been Of the value Of $3.50;
cause tried in justice court, resulting In
judgment in favor Of the city, from which
judgment plaiBua appealed 90 the COUNTY
court, where the case IS still pending.
Townsend & Lusher vs. City. Action
brought in justice court for sizes, being
Q per cent. on contract price for colored
school-hOuse building, claimed as ligui.
dated damages. Cause tried IN Justice
court, and verdict given for plaintiff for
Sl5s, from which Judgment the city APP
pealod 10 the county court. Appeal dis
missed in county court on account OF
magistrates neglect 10 transfer the case
and send mp transcript 30 county court at
the arst term Of county court after APP
peal; from which judgment Diminishing
said appeal the city has appealed 70 the
court Of appeals, where said cause Il now
pending,
G. w Gillespie ys. City, suit He'd IN
county court on account for lumber
alleged to have been furnished city,
Cause tried at February term Of court.
Plaintiff took nou-suit.
G W. Gillespie IS. City, same cause oi
action as above ;suit compromised by pay.
ment Of that portion Of plaintiffs claim
that mad been allowed by the city council
hlN au4- AlHAAilAHtdi HlAlhllA paying AL
costs Defendants defense was that city
had not ordered or purchased lumber Of
plaintiff through is duly authorized oai-
GERS.
Hogsett & Greene vs. City, suit lied
on account for $1,000, for services In
connection with the purchase OF the
water-works. Tried at March term, 1856, 4
resulting 10 judgment for plaintiffs for
5000 Plaintiffs and defendants both
made motlonsfor new trial both motions
were oyerruled by the court, from which
ruling both parties 20 the suit appealed to
the court Of appeals, where the case IS
now pending
y. G. Terrell vs, City, suit fled 1854 |
t0r damages caused " excavation for 1
sewers. Cause tried and Judgment rem.
dered for s2s in 1884, from which judg- /
ment defendant appealed Cause sim 4
pending In county court.
Wayland & Reynolds vs.. City, dled IN 4
January, 1885, In justice court. Suit for
damage 20 goods on account OF team run.
ming on the bluh near the Lindell hotel.
Amount Of damages claimed sie5, Cause
tried in justice court at January term,
on