The Birmingham age-herald. [volume] (Birmingham, Ala.) 1902-1950, 1907-04-10
RECORD OF THE COURTS.

With all courts in operation, consider
able work is being done in the matter of
clearing the dockets, No case of any pub
lie interest was before the courts. In
| the first division Of the city court Judge
| Sharp caused somewhat of surprise
when he proceeded to call case on the
| DAVIS docket after the clock struck 5.
| Some Of the jurors had left the court
without being excused and they will prob
ably hear about it.
| An unusual condition arose in the first
| division of the criminal court in which
two negroes were charged with stealing
overcoats from the union depot. As no
one appeared to claim the coats the priso-
ners were turned loose
Circuit Court.
| In the first division of the circuit
| court yesterday Judge Coleman presiding,
| a consent judgment was rendered In the
| case of Trilby Smith VS.. Birmingham
| Railway. Light and Power company.
The case of Annie Taylor vs.. Birming-
| ham Railway. Light and Power company
was dismissed for want of prosecution
| The case of William II. Mcdowell VS..
| Tutwiler Coal, Coke and Iron company
| was dismissed.
First Division Docket.
Inc following DOCKET - SCI N lie
| first division of the circuit court today:
| Louis Perolia VS.. Tennessee Coal, Iron
| and Railroad company, damages; Miner
| e. Kettig Co. VS.. John M. Bradley ct
AL, assumpsit; Ida Smith VS.. w. d. Hol-
| compe' ct al damages oioney mart vs.
Ameha Slooemeyer' eJectinent' M ~ Ooi-
inns vs. FRANK James, assuinpsi.
IN tne second olVislon On lne oiicuis
court, Judge Lane presiding, the case OF
the Birmingham rant ana Roonng com
pany vs. Louisvllie ana NashVille hai i
company was dismissed LOT want Oh Jurls-
| ulcuoh'
IN the case OF lsalaI Mccoy W.. oou'nerh
haiiWay company, tne jury returned
| verdict Tor the defendant,
In the case OF JAKE Hich VS.. Esther
Black the piaintlH TOOK non-suat-
| Second Division Docket.
rha forou,,,a doo,,at as cot IN tho sao-
| 80 5;,saio,' ns 49, aisa,';+ eo,,rt t.s.s
1uaranoo Dona s,,o ,,s G Tani,ios a
ne 80 sn W n, - -,i.il rs 80
% Glass Co. VS.. Lena Snedecor, assump-
sit; Frank G. Ffte VS.. VIII Harris, de-
unue' fanhe Kennedy vs. Birmingham
RAILWAY, Light and rover company, dam
ages; VIII Williams VS.. Atlanta and Biz
mngham Air Line halfway company,
damages.
| City Court.
In the first division of the city court
| yesterday Judge Sharp presiding, the
case of John f. Hill, administrator VS..
Southern railway was settled and dis
| missed.
A consent Judgment of 500 was rendered
in the case of .Irlia Ann Fanes VS.. Ala
| bama Great Southern Railroad comnanv
1 In the case of Elias Major VS.. the Schoe-
/
rendered for s11O.
Willie Griffin obtained a consent iudg
ment for $50 against the Western Union
Telegraph company.
In the case Of the southern F,o,,inment
| company VS.. Weller & Co a continuance
was granted and terms imposed on the
M nasa 90 roos,o,, pros 20 esoorro n
| 1rars;s ~,os eli Iii ~ ;,,,.,, -
| - ~, 80 :, T,
Ar,a,.,aa,, Sastion ~ Ia, s,d s .ne
nonnoed readv aftsr n,c,ocl ,rha i,,r,,
| n,as saiaataa 80 +,so 49,, Iii -,
| 80 anu 'ne 'iiei "Ni oeein
' 'e
First Division Docket.
The following docket is set In the first
| division of me citv court today.
Nora C. Gillespie, Administrative, vs.
Birmingham Railway. Light and Power
company. damages; Lonnie Watson VS..
Birmingham Railway. Light and Power
company. damages: Albert tVerchot pro
ami VS.. Birmingham Railway. Light and
Power company. damages: f. G. Sheppard
! VS. G. w. Austin ct al. damages. Mary
r. Lowry VS.. Bessemer Water Works
| compauy damages: G. w. White vs.
Western Union Telegraph company dam
So .ooo,a. a,,.,s;a,, os +ha o,+, o,,,r+
,,aat az ~ Easo,,so,, .,rosidy,er ~, =
| 49,. a. 80 W. Gxa,,t ~. ri,
oe' ~ r eiu u.s. .e. - ,'ord,at g.. saoe
r,S. - ~, Wy Sr,ith Nc w d
| pa,s.s,' " 49, ..;ai rt,a r,a,,,.;ee
a,,e1a % a.. We" ,s,,o,,f,,,,,, orrastns a,,a
aneses nc "as ,.tatna ~ soea'Da
Up, 'soeu ~ " % 'S
ant eoui''
| Second Division Docket.
| rhe fo,lovjng doclxet Is set in the second
| division of the civ court today:
Union Mutual Aid association VS.. A. C.
Brown Of al damages: A. ID. Green VS..
| Isirn,in,han, pelt p abroad co,nnanv dam.
aces. TsstoIla Csreen nro ami VS. Rirming-
| bem Ra,t poilroad comnanv damages /.
| Kaufman. Flonacher & COIN VS. Harris
| Co,dstein assumnslt. nj. Finkovitch VS..
| Harris Goldste,n assumpsit: w. r. Me-
| Doueal VS. The standard Life and Acct
dent compauy. assumpsit.
In the third division Of the citv court.
Judge Nesmith presiding, the case of
| James Dix VS.. Pioneer Mining and Man
ufacturlng company continues on trial;
Inc piaintiir claims oamases ios personai
lnyui'es lesui',is - Ne o.,,sad 4, ~,
slsht aneseo 10 haae peen .au i'. ~ al. an
| sNp'osioii u VA " - 49,