Evening journal., 1896-02-04
CASES FOR THIS TERM.
The Judges Passed Oh the
Civil List Yesterday.
MANY GASES SLATED FOR TRIAL

one Case. Jpon which settlement was
Reported, win he Restored to the List
In May, Its Disoontinuance Being Due
20 nIisunderstanding-sec for
Costs wanted From a Non-Residont
Litigant.
Superior Court spent most o. yesterday
afternoon Ia getting Its business In
shape for orderly procedure aud disposl
tion. The trial li,t was taken up and
the following Ca marked for trial;
Mutual Life Insulancs Company vs.
George G. Marshsll; william e ShAnna-
han e6 al va Henry X. Armstrong, ct al (;
Alfred Hands, administrator. VS.. Farmers
Mutual Insurance Company; w. ID
Wlcklns VS. the Mayor aud Council, OF
Wilmington, special juicy Q II Hof nan
& Son VS.. Margaret Mulrooney
w. o. Martin VS. the Baltimore and
Philadelphia Railroad Company. special
jury Shannahan, Wrightson Hardware
Company VS. Henry X Armstrong 90 al f;
Houlings LIppincott vs Richard w.
Crook; Charles r Jeherls VS.. + ID.
Carpenters administrator; Joseph X
Frame vs. Provident Mutual Accident
Company; Joseph Stelwagon's Sons vs
the Wilmington Coal Gas Company;
Freeman Brothers VS. Nathan Levy (;
Frank d Moore We Diamond State Iron
Company, special jury George Q. Mar
shall, VS.. the Mutual Life Insurance
Company; Rocco Petertuto vs. the Phila-
delphia, WILMINGTON and Baltimore Rail
road Company special jury Bsr amin W.
Clark, ct al VS.. Thomas Fagan. ct al (;
Tschudy q Cats VS. Mark Lohani (;
National Bank Of Wilmington and Bran
dywins VS. the Liverpool, London and
GlobeInsuranceCo Company, gafnlshee; Same
vs.. Royal Insurance Company, garnisheei
George A. Casho vs. the Baltimore and
Philadelphia Railroad Company, special
jury; Frank e Griswold VS.. the
Philadelphia, Wilmington aud Balti-
more Railroad Company, special jury;
Edward B. Cox, vs.. the Wilmington
aud Northern Railroad Company special
Jury; George A Daniels, va. the Liebig
Manufacturing Company; James n
Crawfords administrator, W. +. IL.
Clothier; same, VS. Alexander Maxwell
same. w Purnell J. Lynch; same, VS..
Mary Toy; same VS. Alfred \. Elliott
same, VS. Mayor and Council OF VII
mlngton; William II Luden, vs.. the
Pennsylvania Railroad Company, special
! jury Delaware Electric aud Supply Com-
pany VS. Arvld kcklund; William
E Sherwood, VS.. Isaac @ Elliott
Forepaugh Company VS. News Publish
ing Company; William B. Weldin's next
/ friend va William o Guthrie; Nlncsni
o Hill vs. James CHM, ct al Birdeal
| Company vs. James stafford; Samuel r
Tinch vs. EdNsrd McGsughy; Ezekiel
/ Hall va. q. Il. Pfrommer; Horac.
1 I n. Int
Insurance Company; same va Security
Mutual Fire Insurance Company; Peter
W. Calvin We. / 7, Q1igley, special jury
John Door5on vs.. Black veil & Cassidy
Garrett S Smith VS. Heald & Co. Ed
ward A. Lyttle's administrator We. thl
| Baltimore and Phlladelphia Railroad
special jury; James Kirkpatrick W
| Vincent o Hill; Hiram u King vs.
| Delaware Iron Company Frank Campiglii
VS.. Frenk Bsresford william Fennimorl
VS.. Thomas W. Hitch; Patrick j. Ions
VS. Frederick Everill
In the divorce ctsss Of Spriager va
/ Springer aud Jackson vs Jackson, publi-
ers we're ordered.
Saturday was Fixed as tho time f1l
hearing argument on the exception
flsd by William NJ Byrne TO the awar'
OF referees In the case OF Wilson vs.
Wilson.
The court was informed by Peter L
Cooper, Jr. that In the case OF thu
Amerisan Smelling C)mptuy vs Col
burn & Morrow, It was impossible to get
Sheriff Truxton, Of Sussex county, t
appear. An order WAS issued TO oompe
him TO show Cause why an attachnenl
should not issue
This morning Philip Q. Churchman
representing the defendant In the sui
OF Benjamin w. Clark VS. Thoma
Pagan, asked the court 10 grant rule 4
shew cause why the plaintiff should no
give security for costs, he being non
resident It was granted and mad
rsturnable on February 10. The case vii
be tried at this term.
At the November term, 1884. Hof
fecker & Hoffscker reported settleme a
Of the replevin case Of j. Q Dryer vs.
White Bros. This morning William I
Lyman, who represented the defendant
at the time, was unable TO be in oour
and there wss some misunderstanding Il
the matter he appeared this morning an
both sides stated how the thing occurred
As result Of their statements the cas-
will 20 on the trial list again At tue Ma.
term.
The case Of George A. Alexander vE
Robert Dllworth was set for Thursday.