, 1873-04-19

Cllnsr Hrotflors to pay tho Damn-
gcs, s1,3OO--1nstructlons OF Judge
Rogers.
Tho caao Of Hoaney Y. Chase Bros. g. Co. WAS
resumed, before Judge Rogers, yesterday morn
ing. THO morning and part Of the afternoon
woro spent by tho counsel in arguing tloir caao,
which thoy treated exhaustiyely. Tho Jury
brought In verdict for plaintiff, with 81, 800
damages. The following instructions read by
tho Court to the jury viii provo particularly in-
toroBting:
Counsel tho defendants naked the Court to charge
That no recovery can bo had IN this unless neg
If tIs Jury believe from tho evidence that at tho time
the plaintiff sold tho lind to Julia A. Church, ho know
1eeovor, although negligence may 10 shown On tic rart
II tho jury beiiovo from tho ovionco, tnt tho pla-
til had actual notice Of tho tax-sao complained of In
ants cannot bo hold responsible for ls failure to 70
allow auc aalo, and tho verdict must 10 for dofcnd4
For tho pnintin tho jury arc instructed that ncgl-
gonco primarily signifies tho want Of ordinary care,
caution. attenton, diligence, skill Or discretion In tho
performance Of an ac by ono having no positive In.
that warrantablo care md skill Is relative plraso or
term, and Is always to DO determined By the subject
matter to which i y applied. .,,.. - ,.u .,.,
whom person hold himself ot to the public prac
sisng any professions OF following any special 1l.st-
tho law holds him responsible for the c1crcigo Of
reasonable skil and caro- In such profession Or bust
G ss S 1 # m
whom employed in tic 1ine Of such profession busi
ueaa, is itself evidence Of negligence.
Il the jury bcl1oyn from tho evidence In this case
that tho DEFENDANTS AZ copartners, on OF about the
2oh day Of hlare 1869, were engaged u lha clty IN
e ss ID s pay aa
nbsractmakcrs poszessea Of cerain .sxsale books
sonsst other hing, record of ali tax-saes of my
Of no several 1o.s pieces or parcels et laud situated
faiGhr farher teevo % floas % ssdsneo tnt to
= =: s s.s e 4 e sn ps sns hs sas essnse ss I'D
s@eas.t o|hef IL thlns:. aote s,,5 1'sno5sn ss;
upon enid records Of such county, against any Of the
Haid lns, pieces parcels Of land, during tho o Of
period for which the defendants Hhoula or might bo
bring down, tho lbstract Of titlc to my such lots,
pieces PARCELS Of land and II tho jury should also
engaged in tho making Of such abstracts Of t1c were
retained md employed By thS panM M to continue or
IL At 4 e day Of IL sc is
until the aotl day Of March. 1900. ~, and u n1 that
and was tho duty Of tho defendants to noto aud show
upon such continuation OF abstract 10 bu made by
them aforesaid for tho plaintiff, all tax Raca Of said
premises appearing Upon tho public records Of said
Cook County from tho said 0fst day OF March, 1866,
until tho Goth day Of March, 1Bb9; anu TINT they n1n
liable In this case for masion, u any, to noto tax
sale HppcarlAg in such public records. unless tic
puinf knew Of had uutice Of such tax aao before the
time FOR redemption from auch sale expired.
The Court ipstructa tho jury that IT they bcoyo
from tho evidence Tint tho plaintiff employed tho de-
fendah to prepare or bring down an abstract Of t1o
to tho lot parcel Of land described III the decara-
ton, from the 31B day Of March, 1866, until the Doth
day Of March, 1860, and that ut tho time tho
1efdndants wcro go employed by tho plaintiff, and at
tho 3ln18 Of preparing and bringing down such ab'
btsuc OF ttle thero existed tax allo mud certificate
OF Bucl promises, which appeared NJon the public
records u Cook County, flillui1; and that planGa
had 10 knowledge notice OF such sae of said prc1-
1acs for taxes ever having been uado until after thu
tino for redemption from the samo had expired and
the defendants proceeded to prepare mud bring down
and did prepare and bring down. abstract Of tho
Of March, 1865, until Tho 2osA day q March
! 1860; and II the Jury shall further believe
from the eytcncc, that tho defendants, In preparing
and bringing down ach abstract Of title to tho said
premiacs, wholly filcl and neglected to note chow
on tho abstract 30 brought down and continued tAe
said sale for taxes Of tho promises aud tha by rea
son thereof Tho plaintiff without fault hia part, haf
sustained loss and damages az the natural conEe.
ena then tho Jury inatruckel that tho plaintiff Il
| entitled 10 recover therefor In Ills suit.
Unless the Jury also bclieyo from tho evidence thai
tho plaintiff Ind notice OF suc tux HA!o 10 time to lavt
redeemed the lot therefrou Within two years from tht
| tfnlG sale,