The daily morning journal and courier., 1899-09-23
THE REILLY-LoNERGAN CASE

THE REILLY-LONERGAN CASE, | A motion was made In the superior court yesterday morning to place aSaln | upon the docket the case of Ellza M. Reilly against simon E. Lonergan. The motion was objected to by Attorney d. Birney Tutte counsel for Lonergan 1 Decision was reserved.
 Some two years ago Mrs Reilly l brought suit against her son-ln law | Lonergan, for $1, 300. This amount she claimed was expended by her in board- ! ing her daughter Mrs. Lonergan, In ] medical attendance, medicine and other services, prior to the daughters decease 1 Lonergan's share in his wife's estate | was attached. Senator David Callahan 1 appeared for Mrs. Reilly at that time ! MT, Futile tried to have the case brought to trial but failed. Last July he asked that it be stricken from the docket and it was
 ! Mrs. Reilly was not aware of the dropping of her suit until sometime af- | rewards. Then she retained Fitzgerald and Walsh to fight her battle. It is upon their motion that the case came up yesterday morning.
 
 SALOON ATTACHED FOR RENT, | An attachment has been placed upon 1 the saloon and fixtures of John J. Lynch at State and Humphrey streets in a suit brought by Lawyer J. r. Goodhart for Mrs. Margaret J. Harrl- gan, for $250 unpaid rent. The case IS returnable to the court of common pleas on the first Monday in October.
 WANTS JUDGMENT OPENED.
 Attorney Howard Webb, representing pr. Winchell, executor of the estate Of Marietta Bailey, made motion in the superior court yesterday for the open ing of judgment in the case of Howard Sanger against Julius c. Cable, admin istrator of the Lura Bailey estate, Judgment was rendered for Sanger to recover $500 for services rendered the deceased.
 Before Judge Cable could pay the money an injunction was obtained by Dr. Winchell restraining him from so doing. The claim made is that Sanger was paid in full for these services by agreement cut of the estate of Mari etta Bailey, a sister of Lura that the pay SlltHl Wdo blG ul 3ofppp oliu thftt MY payment of the judgment would be out of the estate. Attorney MattheWman opposed the motion.
 CASES ASSIGNED IN SUPERIOR
 COURT
 Judge Elmer made the following as- sgnments for next week yesterday morning at the short calendar session of the superior court: Tuesday, State ex rel Hopkins vs. Cafferty, Woodbury vs the Fair Haven and Westvlle Rail- road company; Wednesday. Hall vs. Allis, and c. $. Mersick x Go. vs, Far rell; Thursday Bishop vs, the City of New Haven.
 The suit of Jackson 6 Co, vs Charles R. Pratt is set down for October g.
 Continued for one week were the fol- lowing cases: White ys, New Haven and Northampton Co, ct al. Somers vs Cromwell ct al: he Union Trust Co. vs The Stamford Trust Co.,; Spare vs. Hodson, trustee, ct all; Appell vs Fowler; Wheeler vs. Davis and wife and others: McNamara vs, Mattel; Brochett and wife vs The Fair Haven and Westville Railroad Co. The case of Bailey vs. Bailey was continued for two months
 Attorneys F. w. Chase and Harry G. Day on .he one side and Attorney James Gardner Clark on the ether, con tended for and against the assignment for trial of the case of The Foskett X Biskop Co. vs. Walter S. Swaync and wife. Judge Elmer did not assign the case.