San Antonio daily light. [volume] (San Antonio, Tex.) 1886-1907, 1897-05-16
NEWS OF THE COURTS
INTERESTING OWL CASES DIS
POSED OF YESTERDAY.
W. q. BROKER Loses His Case Against The
Gulf Shore Railroad And L. @. Brand
Gets Judgment Against The City

The case of w. H. BROKER against
the San Antonio and Gulf Shore rail-
way company, suit for damages, was
decided in favor of defendant by
Jury in the Thirty-seventh District
court yesterday.
The case of L. c. Brand against the
City of San Antonio, suit for debt for
commission of collection of back taxes
was decided in favor of the plaintiff
A divorce case of M. c. Rhode
against ]. G. Rhode was decided In IA
vor of plaintiff.
In a case of Noah R. Cotton against
julius E. Muegge ct al, suit for par
tition, defendant Sullivan's motion to
set aside judgment by default was
granted and plaintiff excepted.
In the Forty-fifth District court bus
mess was transacted as follows:
Loui Jacques VS.. E. ]. Hutchinson ct
al, damages; jury unable to agree.
Isaac Chestnut ct al, trustees, vs.
Maria Young, trespass to try ttle'
verdict for defendant.
James T. Irvine VS.. Alexander Joske,
damages for false imprisonment; de-
PENDANTS amended motion for new
trial overruled and notice of appeal
given
Suit was filed in the Thirty seventh
District court yesterday, wherein Su-
san S. Thompson complains of S. 5.
THOMPSON and prays for a review of
a bill and also to have judgment set
aside. Plaintiff alleges that on Sep
TENDER 90, 1896, defendant filed suit
for divorce in the Thirty-seventh Dis
trict. signed by James Routledge as
attorney, against the plaintiff, and that
in said petition it is falsely stated that
plaintiff was then a resident of Arapa-
hoe county, Col, when plaintiff was a
resident of BeXar county. Plaintiff al
leges that she was only temporarily
absent in Arapahoe county by and with
the procurement and consent of de-
PENDANT. with and for the purpose in
tended by defendant to procure said
Judgment without disclosing the real
nature of defendants suit, and to mis-
lead. deceive and conceal from plain
tiff the false and untrue charges made
bv defendant. Plaintiff further alleges
that she was never served with pro-
cess of citation, but after the institu-
tion of said suit plaintiff returned to
SAM Antonio: that defendant and his
attorney well knew plaintiff was pres
emf long before and at the time of the
trial. and no service or process was at
tempted or had on plaintiff, but, plain
tiff alleges. James Routledge conspired
with defendant to deceive and mis-
lead plaintiff by preparing a fraudu-
lent device, wherein Mrs. Susan S.
Thompson valves issuance of service,
oil that the trial
of the cause, October 26, 1896, she was
not present in court, nor did she have
counsel to represent her and filed no
nsper and did not authorize any per-
son TO file any paper. Plaintiff further
charges that on, the trial OF the cause
the only pleadihgs filed by defendant
(plaintiff therein) was the original pc
tition. which charges no fact emitting
defendant to dissolution of the bonds
of matrimony.
Other suits were filed as follows:
c. ]. Herbemont VS.. Sam M. Johnson
and Charles w. Ogden, note, $2,672.25,
and foreclosure on block l. Belknap
street.
A. Cohen VS.. G. H. & S. A. Ry. Co.,
and St. Louis and Southwestern Ry.
Co.. damages, 1856, for depreciation in
value of a shipment of pecans caused
in delay by delivery, rendering the pc
cans muddy and mouldy.
Thos. Goggan & Bros. VS.. z. Beck
ley. note, 5000, and foreclosure on pia.
no.
Edward b. Bruce & Co. VS.. Mayer &
Adler. on sworn account, $70S.5O.
T. p. Olcott VS.. Francis McWilliams,
note and foreclosure of lien on 80
acres in Uvalde county.
Texas and New Orleans Railway Co.
of 1874 vs.. Mallory Cattle Co. / II
McCarty. CharW.s1 F. Pencil. Charles
.Reihcarett. do $50. for lease of land
a., Concho cofsNv