The Washington herald., 1906-11-29
Equity Court No. 1.


Heiberger ys. Capuzaya Mining Company, p-o con
iesso ordered Complainants solicitors Hrsndenburv
q Bandenburg
Wslng rs. Wailing; appearance Of absent defend
ants otdered. Complainant's solicitor. George F..
Haren.
Tower IS. Ladd: restraining order issued Com
plai1ant's solicitor. L. H. David
Moore IS. Moore restraining order issued Com
plainant's solicitors Douglas & Douglas
Brown Bag Filling Company vs. Droheu: perpetual
injunction granted and reference 20 auditor Com
plainaut's solicitor. Nathan Heard.
Motions for tomorrow.
No g. HuTley vs.. Hurley. Attorneys. E. l. Gies
w. =. Ambrose
No SO. Van Ness vs. Hstley. Attorneys. W. C..
Ba'derston-L. T. Everett
No. 80. Connecticut Avenue Highlands Company
IS sherman. Attorney. G. II. Symc.
No. 81. PreZzaTeuto IS. Petrone. Attorney. s G
PeeIle
ss. MerIlat vs.. Hooker. Attorneys. C. H. NIerilat
and n y. Richards0n-H. r. M0ulr0n and MILAN &
smith
No lol Morgan vs.. M7rEaa Attorneys. W. P.
WiliamsOn-Chasp Roys.
No. l03 Mcclure vs Mcclure. Attorneys. W. T.
Shoies-Hamilton, Colbert & Hamilton
No l0j. Perkins Blade vs. Mckay Attorneys.
n 7. W0Tthington. Head q Fraiiey and
Blrncy & Woodard.
No lG Robey vs.. Haight & Freese COMPANY
Attoueys r s. Huidekouer-S. NcN&mara aud r.
W Haczott
No. Ios clay rs. Clay. Attorney. W. E. Ambrose
No. III. National Union vs. Me5uirh Attorneys
Bimey * Wo0dard-L. II. David and r. B Behrend
No. ll3 Waple vs. Waple. AttoTueys. W L Am
brose and d. g. Stutler-J- T. Hunter
No. Us. WLmarth Pickett Attorneys F. Il
Stephe's-W. r Lester.
No. IL. Soule vs. CLARK. Attorneys, " c. Bal
ders,0n-Wilson & Barkslale.
Equity Court No. 2
JUSTICE GOULD.
Mitchell vs. simpson; sale decreed. with F. H.
Thomas and John Rid0ut trustees 10 sell, bond
$1,000 Complainants solicitor John Ridost; de-
ferdauts solicitor +. II. Thomas.
Bayly rs. Mics. receivers report and distribution
approved. and receiver and surety discharged Con-
piainants solicitors. A. A. Hoehling IT, and Evans
Browne.
Schmidt vs.. Ross. sales ratified uisi CompIainant's
solicitors, Barnard q Johnson and George Francs
Williams Defendants solicitors, Gittings & Cham
berlin and 7. p. Myers.
In Te hnacy Of Caroline F. Corbett: final account
Of committee refeHed % auditoE.
Bassett VS. Bas5et; or hearing Complainsnt's So
l;ctors, f. T. C0-iaday. Lecsie, Fulton & Cox. de-
PENDANTS solicitor. H. r. Davis
Besson vs.. BcsSon; restraining order and rule as
70 receiver rrtuTnabe December I. Complainant's
solicitor Campbell taujnEt0u. defendants solicitors
John B. Larner and J. Wilmer Latimer
Motions for tomorrow:
No. 90. Gilmore rs. Gilmore Att0rDevy &
Downs Wolf & Rosenberg.
No &c. Horn vs. Horn. Attorneys. Albert sulers
w 7. Plumley-
No l02 Fisher vs. Fisher Attornsvs X e
Balderst0n-P. J. Ryan.
No lG Tols0n vs.. Tolson. Attorneys. J. Med.
Si.lers
No los Bailey IS. Bailey. Attorneys, W. T.
Ambrose. G. James.
No. I0s Sclby vs. Selhy. Attomeys W 2
Lester-C Darlington.
No. 10. Birmingham Birmingham Attorneys.
{. Carrington-L- A. BaGey
No. u2 TT0uland vs.. TrOuland Attorneys.
Tucker * Kenyon and Bailey-C. T. Hendlpr.
No. ia Hemingway Hemingway. Auorneys
Lccke. Fulton * Co
No, n6. Hoffman vs. Hoffman Attorneys W. p
plumley-Air English
No us Mitchell vs.. Meyers Att0rneys. Warren
0holes-Ralston & SiddOns and W. c. Pre7tiSs
No. 10. Smith vs.. Meyers Attorueys. N Huftv
-Prentiss, Brandenburg, oDonoghue and Gardiner
and Ralston & Sidduns