Ottumwa semi-weekly courier. [volume] (Ottumwa, Iowa) 1899-1903, 1903-08-11

ouc dflu JllG 6uSlSuuduL were mdTTl6u Ill
Ottumwa, July 80, 1898. She charges
cruel and inhuman treatment and asks
for a divorce and $1,000 alimony.
Jaques & Jaques attorneys for plain
tiff.
Tirzah I. Hood VS.. S. D. Hood, petit
tion for divorce. Plaintiff states that
she was married to defendant in Lu-
cas- county February 2, 1888. She
states that on March 81 1908, defen-
dant drove her from their home and
has since refused to live with her.
L. G. Hendershott, plaintiffs attor-
ney.
Alice Lawson vs. E. N Lawson, petit
tion for divorce. Plaintiff states that
she and the defendant were married
February 90, 1908, in this city She
accuses the defendant of cruel and
inhuman treatment and states that the
defendant is now serving a term of
80 days in jail, as punishment for an
assault upon her She asks perma-
, nent alimony in the sum of $500, and
that she have restored to her her
maiden name, Alice Buck. B. w. Scott
is the plaintiffs attorney.
Gertrude M. Owen VS.. J. E. Owen,
petition for divorce. Plaintiff states
that she and the defedant were mar
ried in Ottumwa May IA, 1901 She
gives cruel and inhuman treatment as
| the grounds of the action and asks for
the custody of their minor child.
Seneca Cornell is attorney for the
plaintiff.
Julia McCrady VS.. Charles Nc.
Grady, petition for divorce. Plaintiff
| states that she and defendant were
married November "a, 1873, at Le-
Clede, Mo. Plaintiff accuses defen-
dant of being an habitual drunkard.
Blake G Hall are the plaintiffs at
torneys.
Eliza q. Klingler VS.. friedrich King
Ter, petition for divorce. Plaintiff stat
es that she and defendant were mar.
ried in Ottumwa November 81, 1899.
She states that in June, 1901, defen-
dant deserted her. B. w. Scott attor-
ney for plaintiff.
Anna Price VS.. VIM. Price, petition
for divorce Plaintiff states that she
and defendant were married June %,
1901, in Ottumwa She charges the
defendant with being an habitual
/ drunkard. Attorney for plaintiff is B.
/ W. Scott.
Anna Simpson VS.. Charles Simpson,
i petition for divorce. In her petition
the plaintiff states that she and the
| defendant were married in Nebraska,
j March 16, 1890. She states that
shortly after their marriage defendant
deserted her. She asks for divorce and
! custody of their minor child. w. w.
Rankin and j. w. Poston, attorneys
for plaintiff.
i Rachel A. Page VS.. VIM. T. Page,
! petition for divorce. Plintiff states
/ that she was married to the defendant
at Bloomington, ILL.,, July 10, 1891. She
charges the defendant with being an
habitual drunkard and asks for a di-
4 vorce and her former name of Rachel
4 A. Morris. B. w. Scott, plaintiffs at,
torney.
Bertha Mehafney VS.. John Mehaf-
/ ney, petition to annul marriage. In
her petition plaintiff states that on
June 10. 1908, at Des Moines, while
I intoxicated, she was married to the
! defendant, while she was the legal
Z wife of another She asks that the
marriage be annulled. B. w. Scott is
the plaintiffs attorney.
:, John R. Johnson VS.. Letha Johnson
petition for divorce. Plaintiff states
|
! ried September 20, 1899, at Mt. Plea
SAINT. He accuses his wife of drink
4 ing and carousing with dissolute and
lewd persons. He asks for divorce
and the custody of their minor child
B. w. Scott is the plaintiffs attor
I ney.
1 Charles e. Hedgecock VS.. Gertrude
B. Hedsecock, petition for divorce.
Plaintiff states that he and defendant
: were married at Fairfield. December
25. 1898, He states that one month
later, the defendant deserted him
Seneca Cornell is the plaintiffs attor
: ney.
James p. West VS. Myrtle P. West
petition for divorce. The plaintiff
states that they were married in Mis-
souri, in June, 1900 He states tina.
he was d eserted by the defendant two
months later. Fullen & Ayres, attor
news for plaintiff.
L.. r. Carver VS.. Kate R. Carver. pc
tition for divorce. Plaintiff states thai
he and defendant were married in OF
tumwa September, 1892. That the
defendant has become an habitua
drunkard and that she she has beer
guilty of such cruel and inhumar
treatment as to impair his health
i A. w. Enoch is the plaintiffs attor
. tnev.
George Brooks VS.. Jennie Brooks
petition for divorce. In his petition
the plaintiff states that he and the
defendant We're married in Davi.
. county in December. 1873, and tina
the following month the defendant de
. serted him, and has since absentet
herself. ]. F. Avegglen plaintiffs at
torney.
Mary L. Leighton VS.. City Saving,
bank, petition for injunction. Plaintiff
asks for temporary injunction re
straining the defendent from sellinl
or disposing of note for $4,000 ant
a mortgage securing the same, which
! was given by plaintiff to a thirt
party, not named, and deposited a
! the bank by him. McNett & Tisdal,
: are the plaintiffs attorneys.
+ Telitha l.. Lewis VS.. I. B, Whitaker
petition for Injunction. Plaintiff ask
, for temporary injunction restrain.ai
: the defendant from removing from
their present resting place the re
. mains of the infant child of the plain
tiff and defendant. jacques & Jaque