The daily morning journal and courier. [volume] (New Haven, Conn.) 1894-1907, 1903-01-07

E3edTig Piersou. Of this city. against
the Lamps5n Lumber Company. 81 ais.
Of this city. a sui; Tor five thousand
dollars danag+, alleged to Ue the result
Of = fall The plaintiff alleges that she
was struck by a Sidewalk plank that
vas lifted from the ground by Wng-
on Ut the defendant company which
was driven tUu close 10 the sidewalk Of
which the plank was part. The acct
dent occurred on November %, "Ip0-
site tn. Pierp0nt & Hotchkiss cOlnp2-
nys Place If business in Water street.
Max Michel. Of New yprk, IS. M''sos
Michel, It ais. for order OF The superior
court q airing all doubt as to the title
to Fitch street land in Nastville. The
right to the lanl Is claimed ny tile
plaintiff by virtue Ct quit-cl4im deed
from Moses and Gustav Michel. Gus
tav. however. with Samuel Freedman.
Morris Rutner and Efrain Drucker and
Philip Th0rinan. Of New York, are all
claimants to the land.
Louis A Fisk, ct al, vs.. Frances F.
Drake. ct al. an injunction proceeding
brought by Fisk and Others IF Bran
ford to prevent the defendant from
building a sea wall at Pine Orchard,
which wall, it is alleged, will ruin the
usefulness Of the shore near Fish's
summer place.
Wilhelmina Bristol VS.. Arthur N.
Bristol, Of Ansonia, three thousand
dollars damages. Plaintiff alleges that
Bristol has failed to support his two
minor children. She asks for an order
of the court forcing Bristol TO support
his wife and children. He has Il thrH--
thousand dollar personal estate.
Nellie Field, of this city. vs.. the Fair
Haven and Wcstville Railroad Cumpa-
ny. an action for five thousand dollars
for injuries received. on August 10,
while the plaintiff was trying to draw
her dress suit case from the trolley
car from which she had just stepped.
The car was started suddenly, she al
leges. and her arm was so severely
hurt that she has since been unable TO
attend to her duties as a bookkeeper.
The incident happened at the Union de
pot.
Alfred W. Forbes. by his cOnservator,
Edward J. Maher. vs.. Henry Fl. Girls
wold, Of this city. for the foreclosure
Of an eight hundred dollar mortgage on
Forbes avenue.
I.amkin & Foster. of Boston. VS.. es-
tate of s. Mag w. ]. Robinson. S
Weiss, plaintiff claiming conspiracy.
William Nj Inins. lawyer. Of New
York, vs.. George NJ. McGill. of River
dale the Bronx, suit for twelve thou
40 fr, Tho 40
ton comes to this county as the
Holmes, Booth & Hayden company and
the Waterbury Brass company are gar
nisheed.
Mary F. Mitchelfelder VS.. Thomas G.
W. Jefferson, ct uX.. suit on note for
two thousand dollars. North Front
street property is attached in this suit
Daniel McGarry VS.. Michael Dryer,
fifteen hundred dollars damages
claimed for assault.
The Horatio Hickock company VS.
William A. Kendrick. a common count
suit for six hundred dollars.
Thomas J. Reilly of New Haven VS..
the Wabash Railroad company, for In
juries received at Detroit depot, where
he was aboard a passenger car and
was told to go into another car by an
employee of the railroad company. He
was hurt while making the transfer.
Trustees of old almshouse property VS..
James F. Mccarthy, ct uX., ct ais, for
foreclosure suit on Davenport avenue
property.
s. Werksy & Son Of New Haven VS..
Mohican Spring Water company of
Fairfield for 81 1900 on a debt,
John M0nahan, appeal from probate
on David Monahan estate, Il West Ha-
ven matter.
John A. Phelps of Guilford vs., James
F. Gallagher ct ais, sued for $1,000
damages for injuries alleged to have
been caused by Gallagher at the recent
DInbury fair.
One of the divorce cases is that
brought by Annie Louise Vance,
against Edward T. Vance, both of An
sonia. The plaintiffs maiden name was
Platt They were married April II,
1882, and it is alleged that since 1883
Vance. who is worth 100000 has been
guilty of habitual cruelty. The custody
Of two minor children. Edward Clyde,
aged 10, and Helen Louise aged IA, is
claimed as we'll as alnony The bank
Of Ansnnia and the birmingham Ma
ti0nal bank are garnishe2d in the pro
ceodingS
A. civil suit for 5000 is also brought by
Mrs. Vance against her husband. She
alleges that he gave her a note for 5000
in January. 1900, and claims either the
pavmpnt of the note to date or sl,I00
damages.
The other divorce case, with names
Of the contrasting parties, the year of
the marriage, the grounds for the &C
ton and the additional claims are as
follows:
Edward Austin VS.. Rosanna Austin,
both of New Haven; married, 1874; in
temperance.
Marian g. Brinkerhoff of Orange, VS..
John Il. Brinkcrhoff Of Hackensack, N.
J.. married, 1891; desertion
Sarah NJ Howard Of New Haven. VS..
William J. Howard of New Haven,
married, 1855: intemperancc and cruel
ty; custody of three children asked for.
Josie |. Wilbur Of New Haven vs..
James n. Wilbur of New London; mar
ricd 1891: dosertion.
Rose Anna TruaX Of Meridcn vs..
Clarence g. TruaX Of Atfamont. N. Y;
married. 1888; incompetence; custody of
three minor children asked for.
Elizabeth A. Roe of Derby VS..
Charles F. Roe Of New York; married,