The Birmingham age-herald. [volume] (Birmingham, Ala.) 1902-1950, 1907-04-23
RECORD OF THE COURTS

/
RECORD OF THE COURTS,
Business in the courts yesterday began
by the organization Of eight Juries To
serve during the week. Three of these
will be engaged in the circuit court, three
in the city court and two in the first
division of the criminal court.
Circuit Court.
In the circuit court before Judge Cole
man the suit of William MacAfee, as
signee VS.. Atlanta and Birmingham Air
Line Railway company, was taken up.
The attorneys were engaged settling the
pleadings.
In two cases by the board of trustees
| of University of Alabama against A. O.
Roberts and Joseph Jackson, Judgment
| was rendered in each case for the land
sued for.
Circuit Court Docket.
The following docket is set in the first
division of the circuit court today
Suburban Realty and Investment COM
pany VS.. j. Fl. Coke ct al, garnishment;
e. A. Bennett VS.. Birmingham Railway,
Light and Power company, damages;
Alice Cain VS.. George Hyde, damages;
II. A. Burns, administrator VS.. Southern
Railway company, damages; Birmingham
Lot company VS.. j. H. Dean, damages.
| In the second division of the circuit
court the case of Miller Real Estate and
Brokerage company VS.. q. A. Morris &
Brothers was on trial and was given to
the jury.
Second Circuit Docket.
The following docket is set In the sec
ond division of the circuit court today:
Steiner Brothers VS.. P. G. Bowman, as
sumpsit; ]. D. Rhodes VS.. Robert A.
Hance, attachment; the LaCross Mer-
chandise company vs.. William Lindsay ct
al, appeal; w. J. Andrews VS.. ]. +. Ora
ham, assumpsit; Mary Ross VS.. A. II
French, appeal.
City Court.
In the first division of the city court
| Yesterday a verdict for the defendant was
given in the case of Rebecca White and
| Ida Ferguson VS.. Birmingham Railway,
Light and Power company.
| The case of Ed NJ. Richie VS.. Birming-
| ham Railway Light and Power company
was on trial when court adjourned
First City Docket.
The following docket is set in the first
division of the city court today:
Henry Battle VS.. Birmingham Railway,
Light and Power company, damages;
! Cora Armstrong Vs. Birmingham Railway,
| Light and Power company, damages; MRS
| Nancy A. Moore VS.. Atlanta and Birming-
ham Air Line Railway company, dam
| ages; George Lockett VS.. Stockham Pipe
| Fitting company damages; B. f. Parker
VS.. Birmingham Railway, Light and
Power company, damages; e. S. Richards,
! administrator VS.. A. w. Burgin, damages;
J. f. Baldwin VS.. Rosetta s. Brent, dam
| ages
In the second division of the city court
Judge Ferguson was engaged on the non
| jury docket.
| In the case of Hood, Yielding & Co. VS..
Fred Greer, judgment by default was
rendered for $500.
The case of A. ]. Sullivan VS., L. D.
Musgrove, guardian, was on trial when
| court adjourned.
Second City Docket.
| The following docket is set in the sec
ond division of the city court today:
| Maysie l.. Young vs.. Veitch and Young,
assumpsit; c. S. Shugart VS.. Birmingham
Railway, Light and Power company, dam
| ages: ]. L. Tinney vs. V. c. Smith & Co.,
1
United Electric company, certiorari; b.
| f. Roden Grocery company VS.. A. III. Ba-
| con- attachment; w. r. Lancaster VS.. Il.
| Lee Mccall, assumpsit; Jefferson Brick
company VS.. Frank S. White ct al. as
sumpsit; Abe Rich VS.. Louisville and
| Nashville Railroad company, damages;
Sterling A. Wood ct al VS.. West Pratt
| Coal company, damages; Braun & Glaze
brook vs. Kansas City, Memphis and Biz
| mingham Railroad company. damages;
| Luther Simmons VS.. Ed. Martin ct al,
| appeal Mary ]. Thomas VS.. Mrs. Annie
| Thomas, attachment; Eliza Thompson VS..
| f. G. Mason, executor, assumpsit; A. j.
| VanDenise & Co. VS.. Phoenix Auction
| company, appeal; Ensley Land company
| sit.
| Judge Sem presided in the third divi-
| sion of the city court yesterday during
| the absence of Judge Nesmith. The fol-
lowing cases were dismissed:
| DUPONT Thompson, administrator VS..
Birmingham Railway. Light and Power
| company; L. A. Harris VS.. G. w. Blake;
lJ. l.. Walters VS.. Western Union Tele-
| graph company; Sol Hamburger VS..
| Pioneer Mining and Manufacturing COM
pany
| In the case of Peter Dorsey VS.. West
ern Union Telegraph company, ver-
| dict was rendered for 800.
| G. M. Wright, pro ann, VS.. Dlspdtci
Printing company, verdict for 800.
Seab Crawford VS.. Western Union Tele-
| graph company, verdict for 500.
Third City Court.
| The following docket is set in the third
! division of the city court today:
| ]. L. Burns VS.. E. M. Tutwiler, dam
| ages; A. T. Woods VS.. Pioneer Mining
] and Manufacturing company, ct al, dam
ages. T. W. Robertson VS.. Western Union
! telegraph company, damages; Mrs. Josie
Powell VS.. j. Matthews, damages; Lock
art Mills VS.. Hilton Shaw Cotton COM
pany, damages; Max Krauss VS.. Pullman
company. damages; A. E. Appleby VS.
Julia Kremer ct al, Samages; ID. B.