The daily morning journal and courier., 1898-11-19
IN AND ABOUT THE COURTS
MANY MOTIONS DECIDED BYJUDGE
 ROR1B1CK,
Four Divorces Granted Cases In Com

mon PIeRs-Ctty Court Record,
 In the superior court yesterday morn- ing before Judge Roraback the Met rcpolitan Rubber company of Walling- ford was given a judgment of fore closure against John Francis and oth- CTS of that town for $1, ,4S1.41. The time to redeem was fixed for March l.. Yale university was granted leave to amend the complaint in the writ of foreclosure against George w. Denny ct al. and the defendant Ernest A. Blair was dropped.
 | Ernest l.. Isbell was authorized to give a quit claim of the mortgage giv- l en by F. s. Smith to secure claim held against him by the Bradley Damn & Darlington company of which Isbell is receiver.
 I Joseph G. Shearlock, through Alling, | Webb x Morehouse, received an order to sell $1,S0519 worth of claims against the New Haven Heating and Plumbing ! company.
 | James P. Thompson was appointed a committee of the court in the case of Sawyer X Cable, administrator i Receiver George E. Beers of the Bald i win X Lamkin company of Milford was authorized to sue Guy Lamkip of the Lamkin Shoe company Boston, to re- cover payment on stock subscription.
 MT. Lamkin, it is alleged took $63, ,2NC l worth of stock in the Milford factory and paid in but a. small amount. i A motion in regard to Gailagher's ap-
 peal from probate was withdrawn aId
 the appeal stricken from the docket.
 s. Fred Strong, as receiver for the New Haven Heating and Plumbing company, was given authority to sell the claims against the company to c. S. Mersick for $400 The claims amount to S1,S05 The estate will be closed up very shortly.
 The Fair Haven and Westville Rail- l road company asked to be made the
 plaintiff in the suit brought in the name of the New Haven Street Railway company against the New York. New Haven and Hartford Railroad com- ' pany in a suit to determirs the right i of the old New Haven Street Railway to cross the tracks of the Consolidated l road at Bridge street.
 l The receiver of the F. Larkin's & Sons Go, was authorized to pay inter-
 est and taxes against the estate. l The Metropolitan Rubber company
 obtained a judgment of foreclosure | against Francis & Watrous of Walling-
 ford. The amount involved in a ,431. Il
 The time for redemption was fixed for the first Tuesday in March.
 Monday, November 2S, was assigned
 as the time to hear the case of the Union Trust Go. vs. the Stamford Trus.
 Co., on the motions for the dissolution of the temporary injunction; for order of an interpleader and leave to file
 amended complaint. The case involves
 some $4000e0.
 In the case of Murdoch vs. Elliott
 ct al, the court dened the plairytiff' $ l motion that more specific complaint l be entered.
 Judge Roraback of the superior | court rendered Judgment in the case o1 | Charles Els vs. Hayden A. Whiting for the defendant to recover his costs 1 Whiting had contract in Bridgeport | in 1S95-6 for the collection of garbage
 and employed Ells as foreman. Fills
 claims there is partnership and brought an action for the account | The court finds there was no partner
 ship For the plaintiff, Hamilton; for
 the defendant, E. P. Arvine and R. $. l Pickett.
 FOUR DIVORCES GRANTED. | Judge Roraback in the superior court | civil side, yesterday afternoon granted four divorces. They were as follows: | David c. Weston from Helen M Wes-
 ton, both of Meriden. They were mar | ried May 19, 1SS9 The ground of the l divorce was habitual intemperance. Harriet Elizabeth Hall was granted a | divorce from James Brdsey Hall, and was given the custody of a minor child. They were married october II, 1892. The grounds of the divorce was intol- erable cruelty. Emma l. Horton of Waterbury was granted divorce from 1 Charles E.. Horton of Stoneville, N. r. 1 They were married November 9, 1890; grounds, desertion. Eunice B. Peabody was granted a divorce from Fred H. A. Peabody. They were married No- | vember 25, 1882: ground, desertion. The name of the plaintiff was changed to Eunice B. Mckay, her maiden name. l PLEAIN ABATEMENTOVE l In the case of Walter A. Clark vs. William H. Bradley, Judge Hubbard in l the court of common pleas, civil side, overruled a plea in abatement inter- posed by the defendant who claimed that his abode was not in New Mill 1 ford, as described in the complaint, but was at the time of service in New Ha- ven. He pleaded that on this account the process should abate. The plaintiff 1 filed a demurrer to this claiming that an abatement should not be allowed on account of circumstantial deficiency. 1 The demurrer was sustained