Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 4.djvu/12

 m ���CASES EErOBTED. ���Lambert Building & Loan As- sociation, Lindsey v 48 �Lindsey v. Lambert Building & �Loan Association. . . .■ 48 �Martin, In re 208 �Perdue, United States v 897 �Steam-tug Anna P. Dorr, Bren- �nan v 459 �United States v. Perdue 897 �Voetter, In re 632 �Wells.lnre 68 ���FOUETH CIECUIT. �CiECUiT Court, D. Mautland. �Brown v. Chesapeake &Ohio �Canal Co 770 �Chesapealîe & Ohio Canal Co., �Brown v 770 �Davidson v. Von Lingen 346 �Davidson, Von Linfl;en v 346 �Von Lingen v. Davidson 346 �Von Lingen, Davidson v 346 �District Cottrt, D. Maktland. �Ehrman v. Steam-ship Swift- sure 463 �Merchants' Steam-sliip Co. v. Scliooner S. C. Tryon 236 �Moore, Tillmore v 231 �Bchooner S. 0. Tryon, Mer- chants' Steam-ship Co. v 236 �Steam-ship Swiftsure, Ehrman V 463 �Tillmore v. Moore 231 �Circuit Court, E. D. Virginia. �Buck V. Piedmont & Arlington �Life Ins. Co 849 �Etting V. Marx's Executor 673 �Marx's Executor, Etting v 673 �Piedmont & Arlington Life Ins. Co.,Buck V 849 ���JPIFTH CIRCUIT. �Circuit Court, N. D. Qeorgia. �Hicks V. Jennings 855 �Jennings, Hicks v 855 ���Page �Cuîcuit Court, W. D. Texas. �Adams v. Terrell 796 �ïenell, Adams v 796 ���SIXTH CIECUIT. �Circuit Court, D. Kentuckt. �jLcechv 72 �Leechv. Kay 72 �Circuit Court, E. D. Michigah. �Detroit, L. & N. R. Co., Nat. Car- Brake Shoe Co. v 224 �McKay, Smith v 353 �Nat. Car-Brake Shoe Co. v. De- troit, L. & N. R. Co 224 �Smith v.MoKay 363 �District Court, E. D. Michigah. Trenton, The 657 �CiRcurr Court, S. D. Ohio. �Covington City Nat. Bank, Mc- �Cracken v 602 �Farmers' Nat. Bank of Green- �ville, O., V. Grcen 609 �Farmers' Nat. Bank of Ports- �mouth V. llannan 612 �Green, Farmers' Nat. Bank of �Greenville, 0., v 609 �Hannan. Farmers' Nat. Bank of �Portsmouth v 612 �McCracken v. Covington City �Nat. Bank 602 �Nye, United States v 888 �United States v. Nye 888 �District Court, S. D. Onio. �Longstroet v. Steam-boat B. R. �Springer 671 �Steam-boat R. R. Springer, �Longstreet v 671 �Circuit Court, M. D. Tennessee. �Louisville & N. R. Co., South- ern Exi^ress Co v 481 �Southern Express Co. v. Louis- ville & N. li. Co 481 ����