OCR Text |
Show Thlid District Cum I. In tho casu of Isaaa Ilarton vs. UavM Kimball it al., A decree was grantod tiy Judge Anderson yesterday yester-day Afternoon, quieting the title to lot I, block 17, put V., and confirming tliu title lu the plslnlin. The en... of William (I, Olell vs. (lourge lloso next came up for trial, 1. K. llaiker aiiJtliu: for the plalntlll and Kalghn it. Anderson for tho deft de-ft ndaiit. The plaintiff sued to recover lnsi-saloii of n small strlpof ground ad Joining his lot lu the Tenth ward, with $72.60 damsges. It Is simply a question ques-tion aa to thu vail llty of tlio new or the old survey. The defendant holds tho strip, which la only two feet wide, under tlio old survey, wlillo the plain tiff claims under the now. Tlie defendant, how ever, alleges that lie has held tho land for eleven years, aud the defendant Is barred from recovery lu any event. The trial was not concluded con-cluded when the court rote. The ease of Fergus Cualter vs. II, Pembroke came before Judge Zino lu the afternoon aud waa submllte-d. l'lalnllll suea to recover fVHl damages for Injury done to his store and goods, through the Action of the defendant In placing a steam pipe In such A ioslllou that the ateam damaged the wall and goods In his store. In Ihe divorce case ItenedlcU Peter-sou Peter-sou s. Andrew 1'eterson the defendant failed to apraiar and the divorce waa granted on ihe ground of desert lou. The case of Marie A. Fothan vs. C. H. Varlan was set for May 20. Ituslou vs. Hall; plaintiff was allowed ten daya In which to file an amended complaint. I |