Harry Sharod James v. Tom Brickhouse, et al.

^ )V)oe5 We Due Ycgc<&> CVaosc of VK& W^rYe^M-h f\ tn&OcL vv0a V y^hxxtt. Vba-V, agg eavoV\na earnerWeXr\A;cV<neW awd Yre3cn-Ve(V Vo cx &mv\A CTunj 7 20was Ye^-honer de^n\j<ui of tt,s: fuuxkxweMa\ Ui^Vf of C^uaI Pratecfyn OV~VWe Laeo i \o We ‘Vc\cd Wlj an \cmcxvY<xV '3ury \0\ven Vbe CaarV aUa^i ma&iwissiWte e^'i<W\ce Vo be eMened aVV^ Vncd 7 .-4' 3^ was ye-ffioaer deyav^ of Vi\s ^urkmeo-\a\ fWf of Gouaf PraWian d? TKe Lavo ,uiW, Vi-e. uxxS rtseofeA^i (rPe k ffrsf T^a'te^ffisfioo 3 ffe Ca^f -too* -elevneM-s Wn one i«df<*we/vf -to Vox" cxooVW-er d\sV\irvV offoo&e'?c G^Wichao