The Washington herald., 1916-04-14
Circuit Division, No. 1,
Justice Gould.

somerville VS.. Mckinley ct al; leave
granted to amend declaration at trial
table; verdict for defendants Mary G.
Onutt, Elvira c. Robinson and Mary G.
offutt, executrtx; jury disagree as to
other defendants; plaintiffs attorney,
Charles V. Inlay; defendants attorneys,
D. W. O'DQnoghue, W. H. Manogue, ].
E. Padgett,S A. A. Alexander and A W.
Suelzer.
Thurston VS.. Diggs; order further ex-
tending time to file transcript to May 10;
plaintiffs attorneys, Fulton Lewis and
John Ridout; defendants attorney, A. A.
Birney.
Cook, administrator. Vs. Cook; order for
publication; plaintiffs attorney. D. A.
Baer.
Assignment for today:
315-Burke VS.. Anacostia Z Potomac
Railway Co.; attorneys, Lambert, Yeat-
man-Barbour.
35S-Morgan VS.. Capital Traction Co.. +;
attorneys, Topper & Gusack-Hogan.
357-Dean VS.. Washington Gas Light
Co.; attorneys, Robinson-Berry & Minor
S67-Wedderburn VS.. Moses; attorneys,
Gies-EIlis & Donaldson.
Sss-Henderson VS.. Mann; attorneys,
Hill. jr.-Sullivan.
31-Jewett VS.. Moses ct al; attorneys
Gardiner, Hamby-McNeill.
721-Burke. administrative, VS.. District
Of Columbia; attorneys. MILAN, Smith,
Burke-Syme.
525-Brosnan. jr., VS.. Zell Motor Car Co. :;
attorneys, Neale & England-Sheehy.
E-Sanders VS.. Darlington; attorneys,
Gaskins-Sullivan.
Motions for today at 1:15 p m
l-Hawken ct al. VS.. Brown; attorneys
Ridout-Anthony
2-Davison VS.. Richards; ATTORNEYS,
Lambert, Yeatman
SKrebs VS.. MacMurray; attorneys,
Moulton, Millan-Wheatley.
+Merrill VS.. Portland Apartment House
Company; attorneys, Goodwin, Keyser-
Hamilton & Hamilton.
5-Hemler VS.. Potomac Electric Power
Company; attorneys, Gardiner, Handy
Barbour. Williams.
SUnited States Of America VS.. Wash
ington and Old Dominion Railway; attor-
neys, Laskey-Lambert
7-Gattis VS.. Lewis ct al; attorneys,
Shellman, Hodges-Jones,J F'risby.
@Porter VS.. Potomac Electric Power
Company; attorneys, Newmyer-Barbour.
sFetter VS.. Fetter; attorneys, Davis,
Lewts-Lambert.
10-Rock Creek Corporation VS.. Lamson
attorneys, Hinton, Hudson-Gies.
n-Totten VS.. Potomac Electric Power
Company; attorneys, Ralston, Riichard-
son, Willis-Barbour
I2-Shauer VS.. Potomac Electric Power
Company; attorneys, Ralston, Richard
son, Willis-Barbour
1S-Dugdale vs.. Bowman; attorneys, Nc
Mahon, Ridout-swindel. Van Fleet
1-Schenck VS. District of Columbia; at
torneys, Newmyer-Syme.
15-Sharp VS.. Fries, BealI & Sharp Com
pany; attorneys, Brandenburg-Barnar
Darlington.
16-Woodward VS.. Hekimian; attorneys.
f-Prince VS.. Washington Terminal
H-PPrince VS.. Washington Terminal
Company; attorneys, Standardization
& Hamilton, McKenney & Flannery.
1S-Speer vs. Wilkinson; ATTORNEYS.
MarshaIl-Gies.
a-Whitaker, administrative. VS.. Poto-
mac Power Company; attorneys, Gar
diner, Gibbs-Barbour.
H-Mills vs. Adams; attorneys, Branden-
burg-Yeatman.
22-Ellerson VS.. Belmont; attorneys,
Douglas, Ruffin Obear-Lambert, Yeat-
man.
3-Upperman VS.. WASHINGTON Railway
and Electric Company; attorneys, New
myer. Lyon & Lyon-Barbour.
AHCrutchley VS.. National Fire Proofing
Company; attorneys, Baker-Clephane.
S-Cooper VS.. Penn Bridge Company:
attorneys, Gardiner-Hogan.