The Birmingham age-herald. [volume] (Birmingham, Ala.) 1902-1950, 1907-01-09
RECORD OF THE COURTS

RECORD OF THE COURTS
Yesterday was a rather quiet day In the
courts, owing to the fact that cases which
were already on trial were resumed.
Circuit Court.
In the circuit court yesterday the case
of Laura " Hinton, pro ami, VS.. Biz
mingham Railway, Light and Power COM
pany, which had been on trial all day
Monday, was concluded and resulted in
verdict for the defendant. No other case
was taken up in the afternoon.
Circuit Court Docket.
The following docket is set for trial In
the circuit court today; l.. A. obany VS..
Kansas City, Memphis and Birmingham
Railway company, damages; Claude II.
Everett VS.. Kansas City, Memphis and
Birmingham Railroad company, damages;
]. w. Dement, VS.. Birmingham Mineral
Railroad company, damages; M M. Gwin
VS. city of Birmingham, damages; NJ M.
Gwin VS. city Of Bessemer, damages.
City Court.
In the first division of the city court
Yesterday the whole day was devoted to
hearing the quo warranto proceedings in
the case of the state of Alabama eX rel.
J. M. Burger VS.. S. W. Wooten The
case is likely OF occupy the time of the
court today.
First Division Docket.
In the first division of the city court the
following docket is set for today;
]. ]. sykes VS.. r. w. Walker ct al, as
srmpsit; Mamie Noses pro ami, VS.. Rob
ert Miller, damages; Charles f. White
VS.. e. p Riggs, damages; Thomas w.
Self, pro ami, vs. Southern Railway
company, damages; Maj. f. Self vs..
Southern Railway company, damages;
Southern States Portland Cement COM
pany vs. Birmingham Sand and Brick
company, assumpsit
Second Division.
In the second division of the city court
Yesterday the following judgments were
rendered:
Sophie overton VS.. Tennessee Coal. Iron
and Railroad company, judgment by con-
sent for s75.
e. A. Wilson vs. Sylvester Austin ct al,
dismissed for want of prosecution.
Marshall Reed VS.. +. j. Kimball, same
order.
Mary Tomerlin VS.. Thomas Buchanan,
judgment for s29.9s.
A. j. Van Dennis & Co. VS.. Phoenix
Auction company, judgment by default
for s33
Second Division Docket.
The following docket is set for trial in
the second division of the city court to-
day:
Fred Miller Brewing company vs.. Mot
low Bros, assumpsit; J.. Giacopazzi vs..
The McAfee company. attachment; Ros-
enbaum Bros. VS.. j. s. Gerganus, garn-
ishment; Jenkins Lumber company VS..
G. II. Smith. garnshment; Norman Webb
ct al. VS.. Will McFarlin & Co. assumpst;
Norman Webb ct al. VS.. Sloss-Shenield
Steel and Iron company, damages; James
IL. Poole VS.. Phelan Eatman and Ameri-
can Bonding company appeal; Postum
Cereal company VS.. w. H. Publisher, ct
al assumpsit; J. w. Hamilton vs.. II H.
Suit ct al. assumpslt; Goldstein Bros. vs.
Garry & Cartus, attachment; j. G. Orr
VS.. w. s. Littleheld, assumpsit; G. c. Ray
VS.. r. f. Boyles, assumpslt.
New Suits Filed.
The following suits were filed In the
| city court yesterday
Tennessee Coal. Iron and Railroad com
pany VS.. Mrs. Mary Wise ct al, eject
ment.
Tennessee Coal, Iron and Railroad com
| pany VS.. r. l.. Crowder, ejectment.
| Jefferson Brick company vs. Jefferson
Construction company, suit on account
for s3596.27.
| Vincenzo Grossano VS.. Republic Steel
| and Iron company. Plaintiff claims 5000