Rrass vwo Cents.

Common Pleas.
{"newspaper_name": "The New York herald.", "edition": "01", "page": "p1", "byline": ""}
{"character_count": 1271, "word_count": 220, "ccnet_language_score": [0.948199987411499], "ccnet_perplexity": [1895.0999755859375], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}
before Judge Clsn6Her


JUNE 26.-.4isrander Hornisr vs.. Robert Henry.-Ths
was an action OF trcspass. The defendant keeps his
workshop in Roosevelt street. in which street the iather
Of the plaintiff also resides II that dog was
kept in the workshop and that plaintiff in the habit
Of going into the yard and upon OCCASION bit
ten by the dog For the defence II conended that
the ownership Of the dog by the defendant not
proved and also that the defendant in the habit Of
thwarting and irritating hin upon those grounds The
defendants counsel asked verdict The Jury however.
rendered . verdict for plaintiff for $50.


Before Judge Ingraham.


Catharfne Gofnsy vs. James Brady.-This was
action for goods sold and delivered The sum claimed
Sl25 II turned that defendant did not fairly In
sruct his counsel and he gave up the The jury
accordingly found verdict for the plaintiff for the fun
amount claimed


Robert l.. Skow vs. Amos r. Tnompson, ct al-Thls
action against defendants partners for goods
sold and delivered Tho claim was Si27 10. Defencs
set up was that no between tho par
Randall Barmore 4 Co. VS. Sams-This was an action
for work and labor brought against the same parties a.
partners The defence set up the same a. IN the last
cause. Verdict for plaintiff.