Show l CASES FILED fino IN N I lOWER COURT l 11 f I Tho following cases have hare been filed in iii the Municipal court ft Kelly Kolly Herrick versus John C Ct I 1 I Mitchell ll the plaintiff asking for a 1 aI ii I t judgment of on a promissory J r J note r w i t r Utah Light and Railway company I y r versus Fife and nn Sewell Sowell for 60 on onI I I account un t tf f L L Harness Db Company COmpan versus I tI I David Campbell for S O on a prom promissory i r N note C I 1 Harness Company Compan versus t John Barrett for 30 39 on a promissory i 1 1 4 note I Harness Harnoss Dx Company Compan versus I Bert for fa l on a promissory r note nole Amelia O 0 Bedford DeMorel versus J E ERichardson ERichardson f Richardson for or 27 on a promissory f I r note t Dr E M II Conroy Conro versus Mrs Kato Kate I for for professional proCessional I services I Utah and Oregon company compan Ut versus J C Gale for 61 on account If ii i George Lashus Son versus Say Sav Savage Sa SaI I I age ago Bune Bunc for 71 for damages f li J H W Hadrin Build BuildIng I I of L Ing lag company for 1006 for 01 ser services Ices j t rendered 1 r I Kelly Kell versus Justin H HI I I I 1 rt Garner 1117 on a promissory note i I I Kelly Kell versus George E ERose EI I U It Rose on a 11 promissory note U In the tho same court the following judgments have been rendered I I I Ogden State bank ban It versus John H 11 l et Ct al and costs given I plaintiff on a promissory note I I I Harness Db Company Compan versus Levi Dunn 24 21 on a promissory note noto I i it i Harness D Ix l Company Comp m versus I II I I t Fi r I Joseph on 00 a promissory Pierson noto 33 awarded plaintiff |