Difference between revisions of ".MTY5MTM.Njk3ODM"

From Transcribe Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 1: Line 1:
Peggy & c vs. M. W. Bailey and Alfred & c vs  Bailey These causes came on by consent of parties by counsel to be again heard together on the papers formerly read and on the order of the Supreme Court of Appeals mad eon the 17th day of November 1863 and the Reports of B. R. Seay made in furtherance of the order of the August Term 1862 and was argued by counsel. On consideration whereof the Court approving said reports to which there are no exceptions doth confirm the same. And altho' by said reports the said Comr Seay has shewn the expenses income by the Defendants in maintaining both of the plaintiffs who were changeable. Yet the court being of opinion that each of the plaintiffs bring at the time the decree of August term 1862 was rendered and now living are entitled to receive the damages for his or her detention during the pendency of his or her suit without any deduction on account of the expenses incurred as aforesaid and being of opinion that the amt of the hires of each of said plaintiffs during the time aforesaid is the just [illegible] of said damages doth adopt that part of said report which sets forth the hires as aforesaid and doth adjudge order and decree that Mary W. Bailey the Defendant in the first of these causes do pay to Washington $449 to Paschal $495 to Tom $407
+
Peggy & c vs. M. W. Bailey and Alfred & c vs  Bailey These causes came on by consent of parties by counsel to be again heard together, on the papers formerly read and on the order of the Supreme Court of Appeals made on the 17th day of November 1863 and the Reports of B. R. Seay made in furtherance of the order of the August Term 1862 and was argued by counsel. On consideration whereof the Court approving said reports to which there are no exceptions doth confirm the same. And altho' by said reports the said Comr Seay has shewn the expenses income by the Defendants in maintaining both of the plaintiffs who were changeable. Yet the court being of opinion that each of the plaintiffs bring at the time the decree of August term 1862 was rendered and now living are entitled to receive the damages for his or her detention during the pendency of his or her suit without any deduction on account of the expenses incurred as aforesaid and being of opinion that the amt of the hires of each of said plaintiffs during the time aforesaid is the just [illegible] of said damages doth adopt that part of said report which sets forth the hires as aforesaid and doth adjudge order and decree that Mary W. Bailey the Defendant in the first of these causes do pay to Washington $449 to Paschal $495 to Tom $407

Revision as of 11:08, 1 April 2020

Peggy & c vs. M. W. Bailey and Alfred & c vs Bailey These causes came on by consent of parties by counsel to be again heard together, on the papers formerly read and on the order of the Supreme Court of Appeals made on the 17th day of November 1863 and the Reports of B. R. Seay made in furtherance of the order of the August Term 1862 and was argued by counsel. On consideration whereof the Court approving said reports to which there are no exceptions doth confirm the same. And altho' by said reports the said Comr Seay has shewn the expenses income by the Defendants in maintaining both of the plaintiffs who were changeable. Yet the court being of opinion that each of the plaintiffs bring at the time the decree of August term 1862 was rendered and now living are entitled to receive the damages for his or her detention during the pendency of his or her suit without any deduction on account of the expenses incurred as aforesaid and being of opinion that the amt of the hires of each of said plaintiffs during the time aforesaid is the just [illegible] of said damages doth adopt that part of said report which sets forth the hires as aforesaid and doth adjudge order and decree that Mary W. Bailey the Defendant in the first of these causes do pay to Washington $449 to Paschal $495 to Tom $407