The Birmingham age-herald., 1907-11-19


 ant; Birmingham Sand and Brick com
 pany vs. Samuel Will John, administra-
 tor, assumpsit; Propst Bromler company
 vs. Ensley Southern Railroad company
 ct al, assumpsit; the Flies Liquor com
 pany vs. Chaffin & Co. ct al, appeal by
 plaintiff; E. II. Hickman vs. o. W. Free
 man ct al., attachment; Oliver E. Swarts
 vs. A. c. Simmonds, assumpst; the E. l..
 Sanders and Gulf Fish company ct al,
 assumpsit.
 In the second division of the city court
 a consent judgment for s225 was rendered
 in the case of John l.. Bonefield vs.% Bir-
 mingham Railway, Light and Power com
 pany.
 In the case of William Burrell vs. Ten
 nessee Coal, Iron and Railroad company
 consent judgment for $95O was rendered
 for the plaintiff.
 C. s. Strickland vs. S. T. Mayfield con-
 sent judgment for s25.
 The case of J. ". Phillips vs. Birming-
 ham Railway, Light and Power company
 is on trial.
 uC ioiioNlI6 dOkhOt 10 Scb III tiO SCN-
 ond division of the city court today:
 Howard Smith vs. George Pagan, dam-
 ages; Frank Strong vs. Birmingham Rail
 way, Light and Power company, dam
 ages; Patrick Logan pro anli vs. Bir-
 mingham Railway, Light and Power com
 pany, damages; Mrs. Emma Cooper vs.
 Western Union Telegraph company, dam
 ages; Steve Williams vs. Western Union
 Telegraph company, damages; Mrs. Jose phine Leibert ys. Birmingham Railway, Light and Power company, damages; W. I D. McCarty vs. Tony Nepolean ct al, | damages; Andrew J. Coggans vs. South | ern Railway company damages. l In the third division of the city court | the case of John Moore vs. Birmingham | Railway, Light and Power company was | tried and plaintiff was given a verdict | for s1OO
 l The case of Frank Blanchard pro ami, l vs. Birmingham Railway, Light and | Power company is on trial. The following docket is set in the third division of the city court today Mrs. c. C. McCaskell vs. Western Union Telegraph company, damages; Shed Stephens vs. Birmingham Mining and Contracting company, damages; W. P. | Crump vs. Atlanta and Birmingham Air Line, damages; William F. Johnston vs. ] Alabama Great Southern Railroad com pany, damages; Oliver Duckett vs Louis vile and Nashville Railroad company, damages; l.. T. Lavender, administrator vs. Birmingham Railway, Light and pnUa,> ia, vs. Birmingham Railway, Light and | Power company. damages; Charley Bell vs. Tennessee Coal, Iron and Railroad company, damages.
 In the equity diviison of the city court | today the following docket is set: Daisy Newson vs. Horace Newson; Mrs. ! Edgar Keen ys. O. II. koke: Seab Craw- | ford vs. Mandy Crawford; Hattie Green 1 vs. Gilbert Green: Emma Davis vs. lief
 ferson Davis; Queenie Stewart vs. Samuel i Stewart.
 Chancery Court. l In the chancery court yesterday the | case of E. R. Rivers vs. Thomas NJ. Slut | ton was submitted for final decree. Woodlawn vs. J. A. Durham, submitted for decree
 V. c. Smith ys. Lillian Kelly ct al, de- | fendant allowed to amend answer and | testimony published.
 | Louis A. Roy vs. Cecilia N. Roy, regis | ter's report on reference submitted and | same ordered to live over for one day. l The following docket is set in the chan | cery court today:
 William H. Kendrick ct al. vs. Ala | bama Consolidated Coal and Iron com- 1 pany; George Thomas vs. J. w. Lindsey | l.. z. Gilbert vs. Savannah Gilbert; B. 1 F. Eborn vs. J. F. Anderson ct all; Joseph 1 M. Stubbs vs. Dyer H. Vann; Charleton | G. Smith ct al. vs. Julia r. Clark ct al. E. H. Drennen ys. Irene Nixon ct al | c. R. Trousdale vs. w. F. Neall; A, C. Bra NleV John z Bra xulex