Record Of Circuit Court

jtfarch term oí' Circuit Couyt, Judge Huntington, presiding, oponed on Tucsday in the neW oourt house. The following cases were nolle prosequiad : Poople vs. James Murphy, charged with rcceiving stolon property ia Anu Arbor. Peoplo vs. Eobert Wilkinson, charged with assault and battery. People vs. Daniel Maroney, charged with assault and battery on a little girl in Northfiald. Peoplo vs. George Carr, kocping saloon open in Ypsilauti ou Sunduy. Peopla vs. Greorge Carr, assault and batteiy. The following cases, 20 in number, went over tho term : Myron Webb vs. Josiah S. Case, as Sheriff. T. A. Flower et al. vs. W. Warner. Hiram Fisk vs. John R. Gates. O. Moe vs. Nelson Booth. M. L. Shutts vs. City of Ypsilauti. J. W. Hill et al. vs. W. H. Pease. Judge of Probate for Ella A. Dodsworth vs. E. B, JIcCard et al. C. Eckhard vs. M. C. R. R. J. Davia vs. J. Audett. P. Gauss vs. J. Audett. T. Hehr vs. J. Audett. C. Ryan vs. T. Preston. B. F. Gooding vs. Josiah S. Caso as Sheriff. ■ L. Wallington vs. M. Hogers. Phelps and Braco vs. Joños & Co. W. B. Smith vs. J. A. Polhemus. D. Downer vs. M. C. E. B. B. Allen vs. P. Mailden. C. E. Mitohell vs. L. S. Lerch, ot al. Appoal of H. H. Cook froin Probate Court. People vs Chas. Crumb. Poople vs Salisbury & Crowell. People vs. Robort McKinney. Tho following entored iato appoarances for next torm : Thos. J. Crowell, Charles Crnmb. The bail was respited until tho next torin of eourt in cases of Rmsoni D. Salisbury and Iiobert McKinney. Final judgment wasrendered in favor of Patrick Loonard ajainst estáte of Jane Leonard deoeased $1,050 and costs against Catherine McCowan, appollant. Chas. E. Garner and Samuel G. Higgins were admitted to the bar. Peoplo vs. Michael Horrigan, charged with burglary at Ypsil?nti in January was found guilty and remanded for sentenca. On "Wednesday evening the court house was crowded with spectators expecting to hear the decisión jn the famous case of Douglas vs tho Eegents of the University. The plaintiff and counsel, and the state ropresonted by Judge Ramsdell, were present. The decisión, which would make several columns of the Akgus, is in substance thus : That tho University can not go back of 6ottleinents that tho Eegents made with Dr. Douglas in vaiious yoars, for fraud, mistakes or deception, and no such charge is proven. That accounts betwoen them have become by acta of Reo'pnts; 1.1,1 Tir hnn. las, aud length of time that has expirod, stated accounts and cannot bo oponed, unleRS for fraud. In the question of $ 100 disputed between Douglas and Eose the court holds in favor of Douglas on account of boing long charged and undisturbed, and testimony uncertain af torso many years. In regard to building labratory in which Win. Noble was concerned, in which time-paymonts or cash was involved, it is held tho contract having been lost Mr. N's. testimony too uncertain in regard to contents of contract. Douglas is refused interest on advanocis as he can not find any contract to tay interest, nor a suflicient implication, but is allowed principal advances. As to chargiug Douglas with negligence for unpaid students' accounts in [abratory, the court decides in favor of Douglas. The result of the decisión may be summed up asfollows: CBEDITS TO UNIVEBSITY. Krom prior decrocs against Douglns, $1,710.03 Ërrors in aecounta rendered, - 525.42 Jld aceouni3, - .... 72.1G Interest charges in accounts rendered, 8(2.C3 Total, 3,175.26 CREDITS TO DOUGLAS. liilïince due froni labt report, - - $2,275.65 Errors, --..-.. 075.12 Total, - - $2,960.77 alance against Donglas, - - . 224.41Í