The Owosso times. (Owosso, Mich.) 1897-1926, 1912-04-26
May Gale ndar for Circuit Court.

Corunna, April 25.-Following is
the calendar for the May term of the
circuit court:
Criminal cases: People VS.. Andrew
Wickham, assault and battery; Peo-
pie VS.. Adam Dennis, violation of
parole; People VS.. A. G. Stevens, OBJ
tanning money under false pretenses;
People VS.. Frank Weidman, receiv-
ing rent for property with knowledge
that it was used for purposes of pros
titution; People VS.. Harry Simpson,
embezzlement of, $1,000; same VS..
same, embezzlement of s643.50; same
VS.. same, embezzlement of $3.50; Peo-
pie vs.. Tony Keeler, violation of local
option law; People VS.. Patrick Null
cahy, violation of local option law.
John M. OFT VS.. Joseph Taylor and
! Theodocia NJ. Beachem, assumpsit;
| VIM. H. Lacy and John Haskins, CO.
partners, VS.. John ]. Giffels, appeal;
First Commercial and Savings bank
of Durand VS.. Mamie E. Crawford,
garnishment; Chas. d. Sharp VS.. Geo.
Galligan, appeal; In the matter of
the estate of Edward Lemon, deceas-
ed, appeal from probate court, Chas.
Lemon, claimant, appeal; Hugh
Crane VS.. Bert Worden, appeal; John
r. Francis, administrator of estate
| of Mary e. Francis, VS.. Geo. e. Bliss,
| trespass on case; Detroit, G. II. &
M. r. r. company vs.. Noud-Kean
Coal Co., assumpsit; Eta Schroeder
VS.. d., G.. II. & NJ r. r. trespass on
the case; Burrows National bank of
Andover, n. Y, VS.. Beattie w. Calk-
ins and Elmer Augsburg, assumpsit;
Esther Kerby VS.. Anna Sharp, replev-
in; Columbus Machine Co., corpor-
alton, VS.. Levan and Ellen Rother-
mel, replevin; Albert Norris VS..
Owosso Gas Light Co., appeal; Han
dy Bros. Mining Co., corporation,
VS.. Noud-Kean Coal Co., trover; Wal
| ter Morrison VS. E.V. Jenney, garnish-
ment; John Cook VS.. Esther Kerby
and Fred Brown, appeal; Guy Har-
per VS.. Mich. Mutual Tornado, Cy-
clone and Windstorm Ins. Co., as
sumpsit; Park Scott and Adelbert
| White VS.. Oscar Mosherman, appeal;
First Commercial and Savings bank
of Durand VS.. Cecil r. Mclaughlin,
| assumpsit; in repetition of Alice
| Joslin, ct al, to discharge mortgage.
| ]. Gail Show VS.. Fred Hamlin, as
sumpsit, is the only Importance case.
B. w. Calkins and Elmer Augsburg
VS.. Mamie E. and John Crawford,
foreclosure; Josiah Pugsley VS.. Thos.
Hoskins and James III. Hoskins, bill
to set aside contract; Neoma VS.. Ar
thur Brophy, divorce; Rolla p. Big
Glow VS.. VIM. McAlpine, bill for an
accounting; Chas. Holman vs.. Janette
Holman, divorce; Hattie A. VS.. Jas.
G.. Neff, divorce; Edna M. VS.. Harley
G.. Cutler. divorce; Claire e. Gillian
Doolittle, bill for partition; Fred vs.
Clarissa A. Crandall, divorce; Pearl
VS.. Earl Patterson, divorce; City of
Corunna VS.. Owosso & Corunna Elec-
trio Co., bill for injunction; Eva VS..
". M. White, divorce; Matte vs..
Nathaniel Guthrie, divorce; Lucille
M. Connors VS.. Fred NJ. Connors, di-
vorce; Robt. II. Scott VS.. Dominikus
Speck, ct al, bill to remove cloud
from title; Jennie vs.. Stanley Peter
son, divorce; Edwin VS.. Emma Gut
den; divorce; Mary vs.. JOS. Caffo, di-
vorce; Clarence vs.. May DeLong, di-
vorce; Dora VS.. Willard Bates, di-
vorce; Alice Joslin, ct al, VS.. John
Lacy, ct al, bill to remove clou d
from title; Alice VS.. Ward Gunder-