New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1855-02-27
THE BATTLE OF THE DENTSrS-ARMED
TO THE TEETH.

The case of Louusberry Gilbert. in the Supc-
rior Court yesterday excited considerable interest.
II originated in breach on the part OF the defendant
Of the following
As1cLss AeREEsEsr made aud entered is,o bst.ses
Of the part sILAs LoUsssssSs Of ne Gle, sod
Of New fO ssS ., a, s. S10 beng pe
Said j. Gilbert hereby agrees 10 sell To SAID Louus-
berr, the good. will Of his C. q business in Dentistry,
as coroucied al carried on by SAID otosrt, at No.
1876 West Eighteenth 81 Together with the lease Of
house No 100 West Eighteenth ST., FOE tho term Of
three years from the first day Of May, 1883
SAID LouLsberry sgrees to pay said Gilbert, bic
hens or assigns all over tseBty per cent. of the
amount of work done until 81 600 is pad. Ssd pay
ments 10 be paid weekly, If requested
Said Gilbert sgrees rot to be any way connected
with DeLiisry in the City of New York. tor toe term
of two ssrs from the date of this article, or 10 do
adv business in Deutstry, except Whist msy be dooe
At No 100 West Eighteenth. at, which shalt be for
the ber fit of laid Lounsberry.
Said Lounsberry agrees to furnish sad Gilbert with
back room sid bedroom together with bosri fcc his
wife enc daughter free of charge until the said 81 ooo
is pad, ws,l ng ironing and light nclu1ed
Ssio LOunsberry allows Gilbert to hold the lease a.
security the pay nen oil the SAID 900 SAID lesss
to be as to Lounsbuy on the tulhmeot OF the
payment OF said 81 OOO Louns,erry agreeing 70 pay
rent and wster tax according 10 tbs lease.
la addition to the above agreement said Louns-
berry is 10 present. Gilbert with irock coat iros
from eXpeIse
Wime.. g GrLBssr slL.s LoUSssEsRY.
Received June 49, 1853 on the shove .s,ss@snt'
Received July 1853, the shove agreement 200
Received. Jul, Is 1853, the shove agreement 90
Recei,ss, Aug a. 1883 on the above agreement slco
Received Sept s. 1883. on the above agreement, 80
Received yep, 90 1853. on the above agreement, s15
Received on the within. s75 Feb 20. 1894 0iIsgar
Received. Mr. cr,erden' check s76, Feb p. le5i
Received on the within agreement. $50, Mtrcs9 Issi
Received on the within agreement, $50. May . ls4
Received Nay a. 1854 s35 in full OF the balance Of 81 1os
within secured 10 be p.d JONATHAN GIL8ERr
The cours sci for the plaintiff DR.. Lcunsbery, were
Messrs. Graham and Holmes; for the defendants,
Messrs Whe atom and Doolilile.
Mr. Graham in opening the case, stated that THE
was a case in which the parties were both dentists;
thai DIR. Lounsbery had for seven years, eSercsed
his profession in Broadway, and that Dr. Gilbert had,
FL some Year, previous 10 the sale Of his business at
No 1870 West Eighteenth st., carried on the samS
basitess at that place. He then rocitsd the terms
Of the sgreeu ent by which DE- Gilbert cold TO DIR.
Lours6erTy the god will Of his business, w.td hs
"a tabishment for the various COMMUNICATIONS thsrsin
mentioned He spoke espe 'ialiy OF the double later
.st that DIR. LOunsbery had 10 get ~ much BUSINESS
A. possible ard of the direct interest which Dr.
Gilbert had in diyertfng business from MIN;
because f0cn a. the money wa psid ne wouIi get
rid OF boarding DIR. Glberts family. me agoee-
ent was tia, said Gilbert sereed not to do eny bush
ntss in NewYok in dentistry, except what no night
do in Dr. Lounsbe rvs laboratory. they would SEQ
that this rather exravas ant concessiOn on mo
mart Of DIR Gilbert in view Of the smaliness OF the
co1sceratsn. From the facts OF this care II would
sups ar that ~ early the month OF February 1889,
DR. Gilbert commenced the violation OF this seroe-
msnt How long before that time he did not khsw
nat the evidence would be able % de@isnnts out
,h.o would be able 10 show that as carly as mai
I'm. Dr. Gilbert commenced the voiatl"n OF
| ,his agreement He became interested IN oasaness
with DR. schafer At No. $50 hua9on, IN" n no
vas in the habit Of spiritIng away customers IRON ~.
| IonI sbetry He carried his instr Aulsoh a MS
| nocLet and div ided the proceeds wI1 Or. Ssnauor'
II was for this reason that thn ae'lon n~u 's on
brought By the plaintiff, claiming damages " s',V,'.
| Cao,ers1 would perceive that they mist lAsW unaer
oon.;dsr.hls vantage here "a MAXIM, out tho
fscts A I, ,Qrantly a. they existed mao possessed
| Of d.. GLber's intelligence, when ne 81 sa'usuof
bins+lf tO such basness, "ouih feroi, W al so'
seofecy in the 6rst place 10 RUN toe nan ana, u
H. .4cond plsce for the purpose OF sr<sdlng dets-
| tsn. Although they would be able W make oat
very cOpcaslye c.se they hight not De able 10 maze
IL ont'as alarinely a. II really eKs ed. lhey vouc
! plsce this Dr. schaHer on the stand, and ,ltooes.
rom DOT having bad any conversat>sa win a. a., -,
| could lot precisely ststs what usey c9a Sax rr,aH
by him vel; he had been assured toss s ~ a,Ibsrt
spo" oy H.. ~ -. ns..ses o. shines sp -"
ssioLs Of this agreement sSd tn.. 80 bn sxrssasss
te had reason 70 efp-cec.
~s, bBopG Dd oshsav y Silh~r ordered -
s.bi p.ramss. % n.o.'.stsrsS Tor ,,,a,ss r.sy
- -, ,h.ss insugDsnt 70 m a. lSsfbsr slsssf
- 70 .sow By smother witnss es~. tsor %
s ' 3, h l. ysss -. s' ss su
s 2 b. os y :ses .;Ss ~: ., % s. csa.
"a .hes he tine n is..s.s a,' % L s.ss
| and OF TIE 'ety 10 go s.NsSs thN.tx
| Ire JOB. be nseT oasss.rry To, dsfsndsn, sdmiseA
r- 20 ,s.. guilty o. ssns ss,'s "a -.
The ofos tb..>: 10 the srs ps,s be SAID tnss
ns' 2. TN. .. ss .. r., .gss .ses u.
hers n, Toun.l~rr, familiar end hss 80 an
soss tt. be .hss permitted % DO 'sss s'' ~,
| 49, -, ry truth 10 hs prstense 90 tne p~. !"
| u s.s-,d.n. 4 vosld be Of ne svsii IN tns &C.
| his Honor voad ssh thsrn- Al vs,. A.,
| ..,S,,, v-r. merged 10 the Written eovsesat ~
osr,ar AZ thai csvrnsnt usd., 10 psfsu .nee
ss,r.nx,ns vosA b i1s ~ sctonabls - noef' = -
| 80, 81 ~ a. ole undeuAhdaS became me ~
u, rr,..sI ~ be t4x.a the concludes sas - ''sA ~