The Providence news. (Providence [R.I.]) 1891-1906, 1894-12-21
heard IN COURT.
Rescripts Handed Down by
the Appellate Judges.

The Appellate Court has handed down
q reecrirf In the case OF George M. Jencks
IL ux vs.. Robert Patterson, whlch hoius
that the complainants are entitieu 10 u
decree that the respondent perform MS
contract OF purchase. Respondent alleged
that mortgages encumDereu sns ~ es',1 nn1l "
chase which the complainant sought 10
enforce. In f84S the property under dis
mute was sold under decree OF the Mu-
nicipal Court. which sale, IL properly
authorized, destroyed the lienof the mort
cages then existing. The respondents
contention was that this sale was not
valid. because the administrator OF the
estate sold had balance in his hands, ana
further because the sale was partly on
credit. The rescript sustains the validity
OF this sale.
A rescript was also handed down In the
case OF Municipal Court VS.. Catherine A.
McElroy eli al, argued on demurrer. The
declaration alleges as breach OF he ln-
dition OF the bond that the administra-
trix has not made an account oi ner ao-
miDistration TO the court, though she mas
been cited 10 do so. IL is further alleged
that the administrative has not fully ad-
ministered the estate because she has neg
lected TO satisfy the judgment obtained
by Gay Brothers against the estate There
is nothing in the pleadings TO show
that the estate has been rendered insolvent
and unless such IS the TACT
the plaintiff has right to bring its action
on the bond although three years have
not elapsed since administration granted.
The court on these grounds ove-rules the
demurrer and RENTS the case TO the COM
mon pleas division for further proceed
ings.
Cases Filed.
The following have been recently fled
in the clerks Office OF the common pleas
division:
Alexander A. Flemming VS.. Patrick
Flemming. This is an action on the case
in assumpsit to recover $4,000, alleged to be
doe the plaintiff for goods sold.
Lcander G.. Marshall VS.. George w.
Perkins. This is an action TO recover
$3.50 for goods sold to the defendant.
Delina Tctreault VS.. Edward Beganess
and Pouthillier. The plaintiff ad-
ministratrix of the estate OF Hypolite
Tetreault and sues the defendants,
who are contractors and build
recover 1900 for the death of Hypolite
Tetreault, one of their employees, which,
1t is alleged, was due, TO the negligence of
the defendants in allowing an improper
staging to be used by their employees.
The New York, New Haven 81 Hartford
Railroad Company vs.. William IL. Doris.
The defendant is q hack driver, who,
the plaintiff alleges, against the prohibit
tion of their corporation, entered their
station in Providence aud sought business
among the passengers. The ad damnum
is $1,000.
Providence Institute for Saving VS..
Elton A. Cook. This is a suit TO recover
$1,000 on o promissory note.
Edward Holland vs.7p, L. D. -Granger
city treasurer. This is a suit against the
City of Providence to recover $1,000 for
injuries sustained by the plaintiff through
the alleged negligence OF the city in optr-
ating steam roller on Keene street.
The plaintiff was driving q horse which
became frightened and threw the plaintin
against pole injuring him severely.