Pittsburg dispatch. [volume] (Pittsburg [Pa.]) 1880-1923, 1889-10-30
IN THE SUPREME COURT.
Number of Arguments Heard in ALE.
gheny County Gases.

Number of Arguments Heard in Alle-
gheny County Cases.
An argument was heard on the appeal of
James Sullivan from the Orphans Court The
case is a contest of the will of John Sullivan.
The following is the will made by Sullivan:
MARCH the L
Win my property to my wife at my death.
JOHN SULLIVAN.
1t was written in a time book and was very
illegible. James Sullivan, the father of the
decedent, contested the will, alleging incom-
potency and that his son was drunk when he
made the will The Orphans Court sustained
the will, and he appealed the case.
An argument was heard in the matter OF the
incorporation of the borough of Edgewood, a
certiorari to the Quarter Sessions Court. The
incorporation of the borough from parts OF
Braddock and Sterrett townships was objected
to by John G. Kelly and others and the school
district of Braddock township on the grounds
that 1t included unnecessary territory, and took
in the Union Switch and Signal Company 8
works, which pays large taxes and which the
school district would be deprived of. The OBJ
jections were dismissed and the case appealed.
An argument was heard in the case of j. W..
Walker q Co. against the Keystone Brewing
Company, Linn, appealed by Walker & Co.
on an error to Common Pleas No. l. The suit
was an action on a contract brought to recover
for work performed in erecting the defendants
brewery.
The case of P. F. Collins & Co. against o. W.
Barnes, appealed by Barnes on an error to
Common Pleas No 2 was argued. The sui.
vas brought by Collins & Co. to recover for
work done in constructing several sections OF
the Connecticut Western Railroad, the contract
being sub-let to them by Barnes.
An argument was heard in the case Of Mary
Ann McCracken against Gumbert & Huey, ap-
pealed by the defendants on an error to Com
mon Pleas No. 2 The suit is a controversy
over coal rights in land in Elizabeth township
assigned to Gumbert & Huey, the plaintiff
having a life estate in the land.
The appeal of Wallace Elliott & Co. from
Common Pleas No was argued. The suit was
brought to recover on judgment obtained
against Frank Hamka, who, it was alleged, had
confessed judgments in favor of his wife to
forestall his creditors.
An argument was heard in the case of George
Oliver and others against the Pittsburg, Vir-
ginia and Charleston Railroad Company. an
error to Common Pleas No. ], appealed by the
railroad company. The suit was an action in
ejectment brought against the railroad COM
pany to recover a strip of land alleged to have
been illegally taken by the company
The case of Mrs. Rebecca Mckinney against
Robert P. Brown and wife, appealed by the de-
fendants on an error to Common Pleas No. !.
was argued The suit was an action for rent.
The following cases before the Supreme
Court were dismissed yesterday: Barrows d
Osborne VS.. Cahill, error to Common Pleas No.
l; appeal of W. F. Callner, certiorari to Com
mon Pleas No. L: Baltimore and Ohio Railroad
Company VS.. Hitzrat, error to Common Pleas
No. 2; Commonwealth VS.. William Hill, Treas
urer. error to Common Pleas No. ]. This suit
was petition for a mandamus on the County
Treasurer to compel HIM to issue wholesale
liquor licenses under the act of 1857. Judge
Stowe refused the petition, and the case was
appealed Appeal Of George c. Whitesell ct
al. certiorari to Common Pleas No. l; Auber-
lie VS.. Coursin, appeal and certiorari to Com
mon Pleas No. L
The case OF the Eberhart & Ober Brewing
Company against Huckenstine & Co., an error
to Common Pleas No. l, was discontinued.