Alexandria gazette. [volume] (Alexandria, D.C.) 1834-1974, 1895-02-02
Court ofappcai. II

VS.. Simmons; further argued anu S,alaai
mitted. ''' s4s
Brown vs.. Sergeant OF Civ NJ p..
mond. upon petition for vi, ',5'.
beas corpus; argued ID
The following opinions were han,
down on Thursday: '''Aas
Hutchins's administrator fb.c
mercial Bank of Danville ~ u SQi
the Circuit Court of DanyiIi. iS2
versed. Opinion by judy H,.,: ~
This case involves a constrac .io,,. NV '.'g
Smith married woman's act If ISS- u:
as to whether J. Il. Hutctus ef n
vile, was entitled to courtesy f.. 'a'
equitable separate estate T.. hi. "
The court holds that he v3S nor WYE
in constituting the statute inserted ' u
word mot" where it had been t '.'
vertently omitted in section rie va
sixteenth line from the top. The ro..
is inserted between the Wor4. .. wy.
and sin" making the sentence !, ~
line read: $50 far as they arero,
conflict herewith The e,l-c, n.
decision is that the act referred .oia
not impair or interf re VITA .g-
equitable separate estates e.! nan;
women as they exist pricrtt,reo. h.
declares said estates to exist nov.
formerly, unimpoired by The proy..i,.
of said act. The old Supreme en-,
affirmed the decision ofthe lower n. -
in the case, but granted raaear-.
Judge Harrison's opinion, Therefore =.
verses the old court also.
Home Building and CorYey,
Company vs.. the city ofBoau5ke l,5
Affirmed. Opinion by judge CanlseT
The question involved wa vhe,5s
when a city acting under its chart
puts in a street OF the city an aporo.1
to a bridge, which approach d-Irecne
the value of abutliug property. "a.
abuttiEg owners have any ri-ht to B.
injunction to prevent the o.aiiu.
the said approach. The court b55.
that the abutting owner has DO fisar.
an Injunction, and that such action q
the part of the city is not such q t.sir
of private property as will entitle Il.
owner to damages.
Taylor, ct al. VS.. Motherhood. o..
two decress from the Chanctry Co.r
of the city of Richmond. Ailima
Opinion by Judge Rely. In AMI
1890, John z. Bell contracted w-
Writ E. Taylor to erect q dwelling hog
on Grace street between Skater sd
Harrison streets. Netherw0od 81.
contracted will Bell to DO The s.
work and furnish the materials Fl
fixed sum Of 81 $50, aud that ie would
not delay the work any time after IT,
stone had been delivered to him. III.
legal points decided were thai the aft.
davit and description of the properly
were sufficient: that where cortn,
is made for doing the whole work 4:
q certain sum, in gross. no itemi1-i 90
count is required by the Statue AM
that it was only necessary for ihe ID.
chanic to give the owner notice o.. ID
amount aud character of his claim.
The questions of fact decided wei q.
Neiherwood had used due diligence at
giving of orders FOR st ne and the preset
ito Of the work. and had not ,!casrd d
work after the stone had been deiyaai'
him. The DEGREES of the Chancery C-l7.
Richmond were affirmed upon every Fal
This is an important decision, as itpr,-sa
for cousidera ion several points in tle 10
st:uction OF the mechanics lien law wai
have not before come up for decision
John Pope, ct al VS. Transparent Zee Ca
pany. From the Circuit Court OF Roa'
Reversed Opinion by Judge Keith Ia d
C ise there was a controversy growing vgi
the distribution of Il fuad in a payment 20
notes secured upon deed OF trust. one ae
was protested, aud tse other was NOT a
the endorser of the latter Was disch re
Pore contcnded that the whole fund Ion
be applied to the payment Of the unsccur
note. On the other hard, il was claimei 'l
he whole fund should BE- used to s,tisy II
note which bound the endoiser The mon,
had b en- distributed between the tw1 ue,.
The court he'd that it should be Applied
.he note least secured.