The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1905-06-07
THE SUPREME COURT
IN SUMMER. SESSION.

5g Especial to Tho Tilnes-Dispatch.)
8 tNNYTIIEvILLE, VA. June G,-The SUI
5preme Court of Appeals convened here
to-day. Judges Keith, Gardwel Y, Bu F,l,
court, being present.
The first case on the docket, Eureka
Club VS.. Perkins, was dismissed for ia +
u1 EdW W az Ey ie. rpeceiver vs. sarvey
from the Corporation Court OF Roanoke
city. Argued by j. NJ. Hart and ]. d.
sna H. f Ha for np pnd and subm
ted. q
Next cases to be called: Norfolk and
a arntei : from i p the Corporation
Court OF Roanoke, and Richardson vs..
INymer and Hughes vs. Jense, from the
3 TWenty-thirdH Circuit. 81 q. lSa II.
The court also disposed OF the follow
Ing petitions: Donnble's administratrlx
VS.. town Of Harrisont urg. Writ Of error
allowed Grant Donable. la 70, or !. en- r.,
the Improvement of the streets of Hatri.
sonburg, was killed by an explosion Of
asgea f. haTs pse9 a"s
Judgment is now affirmed. #
An appeal and supersedeas was granted
in the case of SNVasserman VS.. Metsger,B
from the Law and Chancery Court OF
versed in June, 1904. by the SUPREME
purpose Of having the National Bank OF
Commerce, Of Norfolk; made a party de-
PENDANT. This was done. and at. the SEQ
that certain deeds under which r ckehen
1yasserman and her trustee, D. Kalber-3
man. claim title to property in tho city
of Norfolk, were null and void, US against
Sophia Metzger, the plaintiff, and that
Sophia Metzgcr has n valid and subsist-
ing lien on the property for $Ss593 with
paid to her within thirty days or the land
be sold. From this decree an appeal and
.supersedeas Is now awarded
In the case of the Norfolk and Western
Railway CompanYtvs Sutherland from
tho City Court Of Russell county, a writ
OF error and supersedeas was allowed.
This suit w yss fGr q 5er deay to
land, Va, to Philadelphia, in October.
1901. There was Il judgment against the;
railway company In the lower court Tor
S475.
In Spencer VS., Brlttain's administrator,
from the Circuit Court of Lee county nm
appeal and superscdeas was allowed. This
5ChndWell Britain, which tho lower court
held to be barred by the statute statute OF llmi-
tatIon,
fused In tho respective cases Of Eager
VS.. Louisville and Nashville Railroad
Company In chancery and the sam same sy;o
was over is strip Of loo feet in width and
l9S feet in length, In Lee county over
which the Louisville and Nashville has
laid Ills TRACK ana Tie Tel uStil VI tHc pct4.
lions confirms the title OF tho railroad
company. A writ of error was also re-
fused in the case Of II. Il. blanchard Com
pany VS.. Cnldwell-Sitts Company from
the Corporation Court of Bristol Tho
Caldwell-Sltts Company brought nm action
in dotlnue to recover for lot OF text
books, designed for use IN tho public
schools. of TENNESSEE. The jury rendered
a verdict In favor of the plaintiff for
$500, the value OF the books, and $50
damages for detention OF the same. The.
defense made was that #. II. Blanchard
individually was acting as agent OF +.
Nj. Smith In handling the Tennessee
school books, which were kept In tho
store of the blanchard Company IN Br,s,,
toll A number of errors are assigned
to1the ruling OF tho trial court. Tho re-
fusal OF the writ Of error, however, at
firms It's Judgment.
In IIairston VS.. Danyille and Western
Railway Company from the Circuit Court
OF Henry county, condemnation pro-
ceeding, Instituted by the railway conf
Hpany 10 condemn laid for It's use near
tho Mnrtinsvllle depot. q writ OF error
lin the case Of Leo Brown VS. city OF
{ Norfolk, from the Circuit Court Of the
city of Norfolk, writ OF error was re-
fused. Brown was fined IS for failure to-
obtain q license for hiring 4 one-horSe
delivery wagon, as required by an ordl-
nance of tho olty. The ordinance was
claimed by his counsel to be unconstltu-
tionnl. III
kF,r,, Caa Marcar Ctat,Ia