Fort Worth gazette. [volume] (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1891-1898, 1891-10-27
Courthouse News.


] amend.
1909. J. B. Atkeson VS.. Warren Collins,
! ct al, dismissed for want of prosecution.
| 1854. Post &, Co. VS.. G. NJ. Dodge, con-
| tinued by consent.
1915. Todd & Stanley Mill Furnishing
| Company VS. E. NJ. Norton & Bro, was
passed TO December IA, by consent. No
| case was tried, and none was filed.
district court Of Tarrant county, Seven
| teenth district, for week beginning Monday,
November ., 1891.
5225. J. c. Patterson VS.. F. W. & D. c. Ry.
Co.
5a6l. Weir Plow Co. VS.. Armentrout s
Fraser.
1866. Martin Brown Co. vs.. w. NJ Morris.
5270. Brown & Co. VS.. McGaughey & Co.
5216. Henry Schranz VS.. Texas and Pacific
Ry. Co.
$3.50. A. Gray VS.. E. B. Daggett ct al.
$3.50. VIM. Jackson VS.. NJ, X. & L. Ry. Co.
1921. Fort Worth Board Trade VS.. o, J.
Cooke ct al.
1922. ]. r. Rose ct al. VS.. H. W. Williams.
5357. f. A. Jones VS.. Texas and Pacific Ry.
$3.50. F. ]. E. Getting VS.. A. E. Getting.
53S6 B. w. Pencil VS.. Texas and Pacific
Ry Co.
BY order of court.
/. Il. TAYLOR, District Clerk.
His honor, Judge Beckham, would set
after set cases generally for the week
FoRTY-EIGHTH DESTRUCTION. ". A. STEAD
MAN, JUDGE.
His honor on yesterday took up the GRIM
inal docket. and will devote the next three
weeks thereto.
The case of the State Us. R. J. Lewis,
charged with forgery, was tried and re-
suited in a verdict of mot guilty.
The following cases were dismissed for
reasons filed, viz: State VS.. J. ID. Andrews,
State VS.. L. Verberyick, and State VS.. Mike
Wall.
The following cases were set for the days
named, viz
State VS.. A. G. Rintleman ct al, for octo-
State VS.. Walker Hargrove, for October
IS. 1891. =
State VS.. NJ a. Malone, for November 3,
1891.
State VS.. Nora Gilbert, for October 81,
1891
State VS.. Luke Short, for November 3,
1891.
COUNTY CoURT-uoS. W. d. HARRIS, JUDGE.
Only one case was tried yesterday, j. A.
Nichols VS.. p. A. Huffman & Co, tried be-
fore the court without jury and taken I'M
der advisement. Quite 4 number of mo-
lions We're heard and disposed of as follows:
Fort Worth Grocer Co. VS.. Fort Worth
and Denver City Railway company. gar
nishee, j. G. Hampton, intervenor. Defend
ants motion to reinstate overruled.
George MouSner ct a.. VS.. G. w. Parsons,
administrator. Motion of defendant for
new trial overruled and notice of appeal
given.
Collins & Armstrong vs. Wells, Fargo &
Co: plaintiffs motion for new trial over
ruled and notice given of appeal to court of
appeals.
In f. w. Kane vs.. City of Fort Worth.
motion for conclusions of law and fact sus-
tanned.
George E. kirkpatrick vs.. Fort Worth
Land company; defendants motion for
new trial sustained.
James f. Doran VS.. ]. L. Tyler: defend
ant motion for new trial overruled
" K. English VS.. City of Fort Worth
PLAINTIFFS motion for new trial overruled.
Tiller & Bell VS.. A. Pachman; plaintiffs
motion for new trial sustained.
\. 5. w. L. and p. company VS.. A. II.
Leach; defendants motion for new trial
overruled and notice given of appeal to
court of appeals
In the case of Mail Publ. Co. vs.. Fit W.
L. 4 Constr Co, motion of T: P. Martin,
receiver, for new trial overruled and notice
of appeal given.
First Natl. Bank of Arlington vs.. j. W.
Lynch; plaintiffs motion for new trial sus-
tanned.
A. T. Getting VS.. W. H Eastman; de-
fendant's motion for new trial sustained.
NARROW Bros. VS.. n. S. ST. Ry. Co. plain
tif's motion for new trial overruled.
W. H Quayle VS.. y. S. st. Ry. Co. ct al.
defendants motion for new trial oYerruled
and notice of appeal gwen.
f. NJ. Winfrey vs.. Al. Gentry ct al. 3: de-
PENDANTS motion for new trial overruled
and notice of appeal given.
G.. Nance vs.. W. l.. Conner: defendants
motion for 4 new trial sustained.
]. Z. Day VS.. Gulf, Colorado and Santa
20 a u fpr
a new trial overruled and notice of appeal
given.
Collins & Armstrong company vs.. United
States Insurance company ct al. plaintiffs
motion for new trial overruled and notice
Of appeal given.
Alice NJ Fell, by next friend. VS.. ]. B.
Martin ct al; plaintiffs motion for new
trial sustained.
W. NJ. Trammell VS.. Fort Worth and Rio
Grande Railway company; defendants mo-
ton for new trial overruled and notice of
appeal given.
Ise Poythress VS.. ]. G.. Browning ct al,
defendants motion for new trial overruled
o. I. Lyon VS.. f. H. Sparrow ct al.
motion of defendants, Sparrow & Roe, for
new trial sustained
T. =. Day VS.. T.. Galloway ct al, defend
ants motion for new trial overruled and
notice of appeal given.
G. Nance vs.. w. l.. Conner, defendants
motion in arrest of Judgment overruled
No cases were filed in this court Last
evening Deputy County Clerk Volck COM
pleted the transcript in the appeal case of
State VS.. Ginocchio. This case will be
passed upon by the court of appeals in
very few days and will settle the question of
dispute between county and justice courts
on one side and the city courts on the other
Saturday the grand jury returned in open
court ninetythree bills of Indictment IS q
result of their weeks work, and then ad-
'journcd. OF this number eight were for
felonies and elghty-five for misdemeanors.
The misdemeanors were for carrying pis-
tolls, selling liquor to minors, betting at
craps dice and dominoes, and for permit
ting on the premises controlled by the par
ties indicted. The grand jury for the Sew
enteenth district will meet in about two
weeks.
VELAsCO AND DEEP WATER.