Los Angeles daily herald., 1888-07-03

pDOW Nbs 4 ldUlOA-pcpJcIuD6I lOs
Grosvenor VS.. McCarthy-September
II.
Perkins vs.. Wakeman-September 21.
Tolman vs.. Smith-September 10.
Luco vs.. Baker-September IL.
Ryan vs.. Bernard-July 10.
SET FOR DEPARTMENT NO. 8.
Dill vs.. Palmer-September s.
Kin Wo Lung vs. Joyce-September 10.
Dykes Va. Van Every-Septembe IL.
First National Bank vs.. Bragg-Sep.
tember 18th.
Mckinley VS.. Thomas - September
28th.
Ferner vs.. Evening Express Co.-Sep-
tember Goth.
Smith, Hiddons & Go. VS.. Chadwick
September 21st.
Hinckley vs. California Central Rail-
road Company-September 22d.
Dewitt VS.. Look-July 9th.
Wetherman vs. Goodwin ct al.-Sep-
tember oath.
Bolen Coal Co. vs.. Chadwick-Sep-
tember 25th.
Hudson VS.. Kintz-September 18th.
Boyce vs.. Bragg-September 18th.
Seaman vs.. Bragg-September 18th.
Boyce vs.. Times-M Mirror Co.-Septem-
ber 18th.
Roster vs. Bragg-September 14th.
Roster vs.. White-Septembe 14th.
Crane Bros. Manufacturing Co. vs..
Gladstone improvement Co.-July Sd.
Garrett VS.. California Central Railroad
Co.-September 26th.
Coenen VS.. Los Angeles Gable Rail-
way Co.-September 9th.
Crowell vs.. Lysaght-September 4th.
L. B. Whittier and Los Angeles Rail-
road Co. VS.. Baker ct al.-September 9TH.
Woodland vs.. Wood-Septembe 9th.
Yerian vs.. Enthusiastically 10th.
Doyle ct al. VS.. Zarate-July 11th.
Allen VS.. Aguirre-July 18th.
Boyce VS.. Times Mirror Co.-Septem-
ber 18th.
Harris VS.. Woollacott-September 9Th.
SET FOR DEPARTMENT NO. 4.
Vejar vs.. Mound City Land and Water
Company-September 10.
Hudson vs.. Bovard-September 80.
Kerckhof vs. Eddy ct al.-July 10.
Haralson vs.. Delano-September %.
Brown vs.. Wheeler-July IL.
O'Reilly vs.. O'Reilly-September 28.
Apponyi VS.. McLain & Lehman-Sep-
tember 27.
Durgin vs.. Neal ct al.-September 26.
Latham vs.. City of Los Angeles-Sep-
tember 25.
Dobson ct al. vs.. Kerkow & Schurtz-
September %.
Taylor vs.. Arnaz-July IL.
Mitchell VS.. Dennis-September Is.
Sindlinger VS.. Kerkow & Schurtz-
September 1S.
Pitman ct al. VS.. Turner ct al.-Sep-
tember 18.
Hay VS.. Richards ct al.-September
IA.
Popplewell VS.. Chase ct al.-Septem-
ber IA.
Edgrift vs.. Pratt ct al.-September 13.
Brooks ct al. vs.. Wicks ct al.-Septem-
ber 5.
Strohn vs.. Auzor-September 6.
Pratt vs.. Pratt ct al.-September 13.
Lewis VS.. Lewis-September Z.
Exchange Bank OF Elsinore VS.. Rig
gins-September 5.
People VS.. Garpier-July s.
Neal vs.. Aguirre-September IL.
Cate vs.. Cate-July q.
Hayward vs.. Hopkins ct al.-July Z.
Lanterman ct al. VS.. Bartel-Septem-
ber s.
Speedy vs.. Speedy-July IL.
Lewis VS.. Lewis-September Z.
Valdez vs.. Sepulveda-July 13.
Hall ct al. VS.. Williams ct al.-Sep-
tember IA.
Fulton vs.. James-September Is.
Case vs.. Records-July 8.
Burks VS.. Davis-July IA.
Burks VS.. Dresti-July IA.
New Cases.
Prou.v, ox,1 Eoof1~ ~
O. H. Rowland ct al, stockholders in
the Los Angeles Electric Railway Com
pany-Complainants allege that there is
due them from said Electric Railway
Company $40O. O.S2 for materials furnished !;
that the same company is indebted to
the Southern California Lumber Com
pany for balance Of $311.48, and to
Whittier, Fuller & Co., 1.95, which &C.
counts have been duly assigned to the
complainants in this action, wherefore
complainants ask judgment against the
several stockholders in proportion to the
relative amount of total stock held by
each, the aggregate of said claims being
$116O.85.
Fred. Enevoldsen vs. Eugene Jordan
Plaintiff asks judgment for 1915, for
furnishing plans, specifications, etc., for
defendants house in San Pedro.
Providencia Land, Water and Develop
ment Co. VS.. Chas. H. Williams-Plain-
tiffs sold defendant lots 8, IL, IA and 16,
in the town of Burbank, and all the pay
ments on which not having been met as
they became due, plaintiffs now bring
action to recover possession of the prem
ises, forfeits, etc.
John Vorwerk vs.. @. A. Nolte-Plain-
tiff alleges that on the Oath day of June,
1887, he gave defendant $3.50, on con-
sideration that in one year from that date
the principal was to be restored, together
with interest at the rate of 8 per cent. per
month, but that defendant has failed to
pay either principal or interest, where.
fore judgment is asked in accordance
with the aforesaid allegation.
Pho Pico VS.. Merced Abbott ct ALTO
show cause of title to tract of land lying
on the old Mission road.
DR.. BO.San-KO
In his new discovery for Consumption, sue.
| ceeded in producing medicine which IL
| acknowledged by all to be simply marvellous.
| 1t is exceedingly pleasant to the taste. per.
fectly harmless, and does not sicken. In all
cases of Consumption, Coughs, Colds, Whoop-
| ing Cough, Group, Bronchitis, and Pains in the
Chest, 1t has given universal satisfaction. DR..
Bosanko's Cough and Lang Syrup is sold at SO
cents by G. Il. Hance, 70 North Spring street.
ADVICE 40 MOTHERS.