The Birmingham age-herald. [volume] (Birmingham, Ala.) 1902-1950, 1906-02-07


A verdict for the defendant was returned
in the first division of the city court
yesterday in the case OF C. p. Baldwin
against the Louisville and Nashville Rail
road company. This was suit in which
the PLAINTIFF endeayored to obtain from the
defendant certain moneys paid to the mi
nor son of the plaintiff. 1t was stated
that the minor son had been in the en-
ploy of the defendant company and had
been receiving regularly the money which
the plaintiff claimed of the road
The following business was transacted
in the second division of the city court
yesterday;
Louis Kaufman vs. the Eclipse Rolling
Mills company, judgment for the plaintiff
for s295O.
Roseborough Monument company VS. w.
G. Nutting, jis missed for want Of prose-
cuton.
Boerner- Fry company VS.. p. ]. Duffn,
Judgment for plaintiff.
II. G. Dun & Co. VS.. ]. w. Clayton,
Judgment for plaintiff for $5S
Harris, Solinsky & Co. vs.. L. l.. Fabian,
Judgment for plaintiff for SIS.
The following cases are on the dock
ct of the city court for trial today:
Allen ct al; j. H.. Moseiy pro ami VS. the
Alabaina Penny Savings and Loan com
pany; W. G.. Norris VS.. the Birmingham
Hallway Light and Power compahy; j. A.
Stallings vs.. the Birmingham Railway.
Light and Power company; Addie Solo
mon VS.. the American Guild.
Second Division-Wilie Johnson pro ami
VS.. the Birmingham Railway. Light and
Power company; Patience Humphrey VS..
the Birmingham Railway, Light and Pow
or company; Jesse Ryan vs. the Birmiiig
ham Railway, Light and Power company:
r. D. Duffin VS.. the Savoy Laundry, conf
pany; Jabeles & Golias VS.. Sam Pappa-
george defendant, George II. Stephenson,
garnishee; John FL. Scroggins VS.. ii L.
Ray; M. X. Collins VS.. the Alabama
club; Emeline Mosely vs. the Great South
ern Home Industrial association; Frank
Harris vs.. the Sloss- Sheffield Steel and
Iron company; j d. Gresham VS.. r. II.
| BoatWright.
The case of Peter Parish VS.. James Fl.
Johnson Is still on trial in the circuit
court 1t is alleged that the defendant
sold the site of the building occupied by
| j. Blach & Sons while plaintiff still had
lease upon a part Of 1t, wherefofe plain
| tiff prays for damages to the extent OF
| $1,000.
The following new suits were filed in
| the circuit court yesterday:
! James Murphy VS.. the Southern Rail-
way company, damages to the extent OF
$780, Plaintiff alleges In his petition that
| he was in the employ OF the defendant
| company at work on or about belt when
| the belt broke and one end struck the
plaintiff who was thrown some distance
and seriously and painfully injured.
| Frank Harris VS.. the Sloss-Shefheld
Steel and Iron company. damages to the
extent of $1,000. 1t is alleged in the petit
i ton that the plaintiff was in the employ
of the defendant on and about March Is,
] 1906, when he was painfully and seriously
injured and burned about the feet and
body by melted iron at furnace operated
| by the defendant company.
Notice was received at the circuit court
yesterday that the supreme court had adj
mitted to practice George w. Yancey and
David 8. Anderson. who passed their ex-
aminations before the circuit COURT bar
some time ago.
The following cases are on the docket
the circuit court for trial today:
N. III. Broadhurst VS.. the Birmingham
Railway, Light and Power company; Lee
liza McMekin vs. the Sloss-Sheffield Steel