Waterbury Democrat., 1901-02-16
THE CIVIL DOCKET.
A Large Number of Cases to Be Tried
 at Next Term of Court

at Next Term of Court.
 The civil docket of the superior court was looked oyer this morning by members of the local bar and a number of cases were claimed for trial at the next term of the court which opens week or two from next Tuesday. This will depend upon the number of cases that may be tried by the criminal jury next week. Following are the cases:
 William Brennan vs The Berlin Iron
 Bridge Co, Michael Vernel vs City of Waterbury, Mrs George H. flag
 gerty vS Borough of Naugatuck, Peter
 Warerera vs Thomas F. Maher, Peter Burns, appeal from probate; Mat
 thew Colwel against the city and the
 town of Waterbury against the city of
 Waterbury, Gotfried Gerou, admlnis-
 trator. vs N. Y., N. H. and H. k. k.
 Co; Robert K. Brown ct al vS City of
 Waterbury, Samuel r. Williams vs
 Obadiah w. F., Randolph ct al, Henry
 MakeDeace vS the City of Waterbury,
 Ann J. Partree vs Theodore Atwood
 ct al. John w. Gaffney ct al vS Thomas McCabe, Thomas Kelly vS the City of
 Waterbury ct al. George IT. Gloves Ts
 Randolph Gloves Go. Frederick N. Bowtiitch vs the Goodyear Metallic
 Rubber Shoe Go, Edwin C. Fuller vs
 N Y.. \. H. and H. R. R. Co, George
 H. Cloves vs Charles Miller, ct al, The Shoe Hardware Co vS John Me Linden. William Thornton. admins
 trator. vs \. Y.. N H. and H. R. +. Co, the City of Waterbury vs Connec- ticut Lighting and Power Co. GiOvan- no Lumbardo. administrator, vS Frank Miller ct al. George Berid, admins
 trator. vs N. Y.. \. II. and H. R. k. Co. Terrence F. CarmOdy. trustee. vS Watson NJ. Hurlburt ct al, Robert Il. ! Welton vS Emma G. Welton. AnSon Scovill ct al. appeal from probate. John Fitzgerald ys the Connecticut Lighting and Power Co. Timothy J. Fitzgerald vs the Connecticut Lighting and Power Co. Edward Curtin. ad- ministrator. vs the \. Y.. X. II. and II. R. k. Co. Archie l.. Stanton vs ! John ". Gaffney. Edward McGrath
 yS William Nctirath. Mary A. Keller vS Frederick W. Keller, Wilson C.. Bradley vs Emma Bradley. Grace F.. | McGivney yS John AIctiivney, Wilson Black. ct uN. administrator. VS DaYld GriggS ct al. John J. Bolger Vs the l N. Y. x. H. and II. l.. R. Co. Thomas II. Hayes vs the N. Y. \. II. and II. | R. R.. Catherine Metz vs Joseph Metz, George Alderman vs Anna NJ. Acker- | man. AnSOn l.. Hamm VS Waterbury
 Manufacturing Co.
 Miss Susan ONeill of Waterbury ap- | peared in the superior court at New 1 Haven yesterday in the case of Albert NJ. Burritt and others against Angelo 1 C. Burritt. There are two suits 1n- ! volving an SSOOO probate bond given l for the defendant as guardian of 1 Samuel Burltt. whose estate it is claimed he never accounted for. A
 motion was made for q limitation of
 the time for complying with the court s order on a demurrer i'll the case. This motion was allowed and Miss O'Neill was ordered to comply with the court s
 order before Tuesday. The matter of consolidating the two suits was con tinued until next week. A motion was
 made to strike out and correct the complaints in the three suits for SJ0O0 of Elisha LeavenWOrth against Michael r. Lawlor and others of Wa terbury. was made. The suits are to
 be consolidated as they all refer to the alleged treSpaSS of the defendants by
 a portion of their building, which it is claimed extends over the line of the
 plaintiffs property in Bank street. Wa terhury. ln the suit of the Western Realty and Investment company against Albert II. Mills of Waterbury. a suit for $1 200 on d note, a bond of $50 to prosecute was ordered in two weeks