Page images
PDF
EPUB
[blocks in formation]

TUBULAR RIVET Co. v. COPELAND.

(January 30, 1890.)

Appeal from the circuit court of the United States for the district of Massachusetts. See 26 Fed. Rep. 706.

Chauncy Smith, for appellant. G. M. Plympton, for appellee.

VINAL V. CONTINENTAL CONST. & IMP. Co.

(December 23, 1889.)

In error to the circuit court of the United States for the northern district of New York. See 35 Fed. Rep. 673.

No opinion. Docketed and dismissed, with costs, on motion of William A. Mc

No opinion. Dismissed, with costs, pur- Kenney, for defendants in error. suant to the tenth rule.

[blocks in formation]

VIRGINIA MIDLAND RY. Co. v. WILKINS. (October 17, 1889.)

Appeal from the circuit court of the United States for the eastern district of Virginia.

John N. Staples and Linden Kent, for appellant.

No opinion. Dismissed, with costs, on motion of Linden Kent, of counsel, for appellant.

WARREN V. HENDERSON.

(January 22, 1890.)

Appeal from the circuit court of the United States for the eastern district of North Carolina.

No opinion. Dismissed, with costs, on motion of R. H. Battle, for appellants.

WASHINGTON & G. RY. Co. v. DISTRICT OF
COLUMBIA.

(December 2, 1889.)

In error to the supreme court of the district of Columbia.

Walter D. Davidge and Enoch Totten, for plaintiff in error. Henry E. Davis and A. G.

Biddle, for defendant in error.

No opinion. Judgment reversed, with costs, per stipulation, and on the authority of the decision of this court in the case of Metropolitan R. Co. v. District of Columbia, 132 U. S. 1, ante, 19, (No. 5 of October term, 1889,) and cause remanded with directions to enter judgment for the defendant on the demurrer to the pleas of the statute of limitations.

WESSELS V. THE ALENE, etc.
(October 9, 1889.)

Appeal from the circuit court of the United States for the eastern district of New York. See 25 Fed. Rep. 562.

James K. Hill, Henry T. Wing, and Harrington Putnam, for appellant. Everett P. Wheeler, for appellee.

No opinion. Dismissed, pursuant to the twenty-eighth rule.

WHEELOCK V. SHIRK.

(July 29, 1889.)

Appeal from the circuit court of the United States for the northern district of Illinois.

[blocks in formation]
« ՆախորդըՇարունակել »