Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1899-03-24

In favor Of the defendant in error, and
the Supreme Court simply afiirms the de-
cisiOn. The company contended that the
lower court had no jurisdiction, as the
wrong complained of by Brown was in
violation Of an obligation TO perform a
duty which appeared from a record of the
court Of the county of Henrico. The
violation Of such duty, the court holds
occurred in Richmond.
The court further holds that section
32lS Of the Code, providing that the juris-
diction Of wrts Of mandamus shall be IN
the Circuit Court Of the county wherein
the record. or proceeding IS, TO which the
writ relates, has no application IN TINS
case. The opinion holds further that the
demurrer 10 the petition was properly
overruled. The grounds OF demurrer
were that the petition should nave Deeh
brought in the name Of an officer autho-
rizcd TO represent the Communicating
that the petitioner failed to allege that
ne was a permanent resident on Brook
land Park Boulevard. or that he owned
or leased a home there; and. lastly, that
the prayer,of the petitioner is wider than
the wrong Of which complaint Is made
| The court decides against the company
at every point.
Hairston Gets New Trial.
! The court orders a new trial OF the
case OF HairstOn vs.. the Commonwealth
from the Circuit Court Of Henry county.
| Hairston was convicted Of attempted
criminal assault upon girl OF Henry
| county, and his term of imprisonment
| fixed at eight years in the penitentiary.
The case came up on appeal on the
ground that the verdict of the jury was
defective for uncertainty. The opinion,
! written by judge Rely holds the verdict
/ pIc
| ground that the evidence was not sufh-
| Client TO convict. "The whole evidence,
| taken together, is Of a very doubtful and
inconclusive character" says the opinion.
SUMMARY.
Judge J mes Keith-Trimble VS.. Com
monwealth Corporation Court of Lynch
burg Reversed.
Judge John w. Riely-Harrison VS..
| commonwealth. County Court Of Henry
! county. Reversed.
Judge rGeorge NJ. Observation-Disclosures
! Railway and Electric Company VS.. Brown.
| Circuit Court, city of Richmond. Affirm
| cd.
Hurst VS. Leckie. Corporation Court Of
Buena Vista. Appeal and supersedeas'
| Bond, 500.
surface VS.. Surface. Circuit Court Of
| Montgomery county. Appeal and super
sedeas. No bond.
Atkyns & Co. vs.. City Of Rich
| mond. Hastings Court city OF Rich
mond. Writ of error and supersedeas'
| Bond $50. c,,..,.
| GRADY vs. Sulphur Mines &c. Circuit
| Court of Louisa county. writ or error
and supersedeas. Bond, 500.
| CITY of Norfolk vs.. Young ct ais. CIR
| cuit Court city of Norfolk. Writ OF error
| &c. Bond, 500.
Hall vs.. Caldwell. Circuit Court OF
| Pulaski county. Appeal and supersedeas'
| Eond, $50. oA,o
! Birckhead vs.. Chesapeake and ohio
| Railway Company. Circuit Court or Cui-
| neper county. Writ Of error refused.
| Miller VS.. King. Circuit Court OF Alex
| andria county. Appeal refused.
| Winfree VS.. First National Bank oil
! Lexington. Submitted.
| nv the Court-Roanoke Street-kallway
| Companv VS.. Hicks, trustee. Motion u
| amend order. Motion refused.
| Kimban and Fink, receivers VS.. Law
' rence's Administrator. Petition 10 ieheai'
| Petition refused. ,-,o,, o,d
| enencer's Administrator VS.. FleId an1
| crav. Further argued by James q. Fle'd
| for attendants in error and D. L. JeitiieS
| for plaintin in error, and submitted