Ottumwa tri-weekly courier. [volume] (Ottumwa, Iowa) 1903-1916, 1906-03-17

account. Plaintiff prays for Judgment
In the sum Of 1898 and writ of at.
tachment. W. H. McElroy, attorney
for plaintiff.
9. S. Algire VS.. Nora Algire, ct al,
petition In .replevin. Lowenberg &
, Coen, attorneys for the plaintiff.
w. S. Humphrey vs. r. A. Houghton,
ct al, suit in attachment, appeal from
Justice court. A. w Enoch, attorney
for the plaintiff; McNett & McNett,
attorneys for the C. B. & @. Ry Co. as
garnishee.
Martin Furniture Co. VS. R. A.
Houghton ct al, suit in attachment, ap-
peal from justice court. A. w. Enoch,
attorney for the plaintiff; McNett &
McNett, attorneys for the G. B. & @.
Ry Co. as garnishee.
Harry Swenson VS.. r. A. Houghton
ct al, suit in attachment appeal from
Justice court A. w. Enoch, attorney
for the plaintiff; McNett G. McNett, at
torney for the G. B. &. Q. Ry. Co. as
garnishee.
j. B. Sax VS.. r. A. Houghton ct. al,
suit in attachment. appeal from JUS
tice court. C.. w. Whitmore, attorney
for the plaintiff; McNett & McNett,
attorneys for the G. B. & @. Ry. Co.
as garnishee.
Bert A. Warren VS.. w. H. Sanders
ct al, suit in attachment. Plaintiff
prays for judgment in the sum Of
$3.50 and writ of attachment Walter
H. McElroy, attorney for the plaintiff.
Peach & Cresswell Clothing Co. VS..
Roy Hicks, suit in attachment. Plain
tiff prays for Judgment in the sum
of S21.25 and writ of attachment. J..
F. Weber, attorney for the plaintiff.
e. e. Picker VS.. G. L. Walker and
Hattie Walker, suit on account. Plain
tiff prays for judgment in the sum of
S166.52 and costs. Gilmore & Moon,
attorneys for the plaintiff.
e. e Picker VS.. John MCGUIRE and
Jennie Mcclure, suit on account.
Plaintiff prays for judgment in the
sum Of S21s.01 and costs. Gilmore &
Moon, attorneys for the plaintiff.
e. u. Picker VS.. James Campbell
and Mary Campbell, suit on account.
Plaintiff prays for judgment in the
sum of 1874 and costs. Gilmore &
Moon, attorneys for the plaintiff.
Ottumwa Mill & Construction Co. VS..
e. A Manchester, suit on account.
Plaintiff prays for judgment in the
sum of $65752 and COSTS Smith &
Lewis, attorneys for the plaintiff.
Moore-Hagarty Lumber Co. VS.. West
ern Machine Co., petition at law. Plain
tiff prays for judgment in the sum
of $163.06, due on account. Tisdale &
Heindel, attorneys for the plaintiff.
w. e. Jones VS.. ]. j. Tracy. suit on
note. Plaintiff prays for judgm ent in
the sum of $239.03 on certain promls.
sorry note Gilmore &, Moon, attorneys
for the plaintiff.
John HARRISON VS.. M. d. Shirley and
w. V. Silvers, petition at law Plain
tiff asks for the recovery of $3.50 paid
to the treasurer of Monroe county.
Mitchell & Hunter, attorneys for the
plaintiff
Ottumwa Hardware Co., VS.. S. S.
Hayes and Eva M. Hayes, suit on ac-
count and writ of error, appeal from
Justice court. &C. w. Whitmore, attor-
ney for the plaintiff A. G. Steck, attor-
ney for the defendants.
S. e. Wright and H. L. Scott VS.. L..
Dudgeon, suit in replevin, appeal from
justiea court. Jaques & Jaques and
A. G. Stecll, attorneys for the plain
tiffs; Smith & Lewis, attorneys for
the defendant.
Patrick Ward VS.. the Wabash Rail-
road Co., suit for damages in the sum
of $140, alleged to be due for the kill
ing of some stock by train operated by
defendant company. H. L. Manion,
attorney for plaintiff.
Randall T. Chew, ST.. and Randall
T. Chew, Jr., VS.. the Wabash Railroad
Co., suit for damages in the sum of
$841.50, said to have been due for loss
of property caused by fire from engine
operated by said defendant company.
w. w. Rankin and Chester w. Whit.
more, attorneys for the plaintiffs.
H. Wood VS.. G. R. /. & P. Ry. Co.,
suit for damages in the sum of $500
for the loss of horse said to have
been caused by the negligence of COM
pany. Steck & Daugherty, attorneys
for the plaintiff.
j. L. Warner ct al VS.. G. R. 1. & P.
Ry. Co., suit for damages in the sum
of $500 alleged to have been due be-
cause of defendant filing ditch and
causing impairment to the drainage
of plaintiffs land. Smith & Lewis,
attorneys for the plaintiff.
E. H. Emery & Co. VS.. G. R. |. & p.
Ry. Co., suit for damages in the sum
of 500 with interest and costs, said
to have been due by the negligence of
defendant company in proper shipment
of car Of fruit D. H. Emery, attorney
for the plaintiff.
Blair & Chismah vs.. G. B. & @. Ry.
Co., suit for damages in the sum of
$345. said to have been due because
of the unnecessary delay in transpor-
tation. Seneca Cornell, attorney for
the plaintiffs.
Ottunwa Cut Stone Co. VS.. G. B. &
@. Ry. Co., suit for damages in the
sum of $225, alleged to have been sus-
tanned in the transportation of cut
stone from Bedford, Ind, to Charlton
by the defendant company. Smith &
Lewis, attorneys for the plaintiff.
Thomas H. Picker VS.. City of OF
tumwa and The Iowa Telephone Co.,
suit for damages in the sum of $4,000,
said to have been due for the loss of
goods and damage to delivery wagon
because of the negligence of said de-
PENDANTS in piling rock and maintain
ing a telephone pole In certain alley.
a. w. Enoch attorney for plaintiff.