The New Bloomfield, Pa. times. (New Bloomfield, Pa.) 1877-188?, 1877-01-23
Reported for The Times, by b. P. McIntre, Esq
Court Proceedings.
THIRD WEEK .

Thomas Reeder VS.. j. w. Williamson,
Sheriff. We made brief mention of
this case in our last issue, it being then
on trial. This suit was brought to re-
cover damages for certain personal
property sold by Sheriff Williamson on
Executions issued against Jno. Reeder,
father of the above Plaintiff, Thomas
Reeder, and which the said Plaintiff
claimed was his, and not the property
of Jno. Reeder. The true Defendants
were Jno. Boyles and Bupp, who were
the bail of Jno. Reeder In the judg-
ments upon which the Executions as
above stated were issued, and who gave
to the Sheriff bond of indemnity to
secure him from any loss, by said sale,
they believing that Thomas Reeder,
Plaintiff, in this case had no interest in
the property, but was only claiming it
to prevent the creditors of Jno. Reeder
from disposing of it to pay his honest
debts. The Sheriff, after receiving the
bond of indemnity, went on and sold
goods to the amount of $441.85. After
a long trial, the jury returned verdict
for Plaintiff for $285.30 A motion
was made by Defendants counsel for a
new trial. w. A. & w. H. Sponsler for
Plaintiff; McIntire and Barnett for
Defendant.
w. II. Minick's use VS.. Esther
Meyers, administrative of Daniel Mey-
ers, Sr., deceased, with notice to the heirs
of said Daniel Meyers, Sr. The actual
Defendants in this case were Henry
Meyers, and Daniel Meyers, Jr., and
suit was brought by w. H. Minick, one
of the creditors of the late Daniel Mey-
ers to test the title to two farms in Cen
tire township, worth about $4,000, form
erly owned by said Daniel Meyers, Sr.,
but now claimed by his sons, Henry
Meyers and Daniel Meyers, Jr., by vir-
tue of certain agreements made in the
year 1866 between them and their
father, by which they We're to go into
actual possession of said real estate upon
complying with certain conditions dur
ing the life time of their father, and at
his death, each to pay to the other heirs
81 900. After this agreement Daniel
Meyers, Sr., became involved and gave
his judgments for his debts. There were
fifteen other suits against same Defend
ant, involving same facts and by agree
ment by parties to be tried by same
jury. The jury rendered special ver-
dict sustaining the contract between
Daniel Meyers, Sr., and his two sons
Henry and Daniel as above stated
Barnett and Seibert for Plaintiff; /;
Mc1ntire and Sponsler for Defendant.
Christian B. Letter VS.. the Township
of Howe. This was an action brought
by the Plaintiff to recover damages for
the loss sustained by him by reason of
the negligence of the Supervisors of said
Township of Howe, in keeping in good
repair the road known as the "River
road" in said Township.
The Defendants took defence that they
had given warning of the unsafe condi-
ton of said road by obstructing the same
at each end with pair of bars, also by
posting up notices setting forth the dam
ger of travelling the same.
They also averred their inability to
keep the said road in repair. 1t was
proven on the trial that Plaintiff was
cognizant of the dangerous condition of
the road prior to the time his alleged
damages were sutained.-Verdict for
Defendant. w. A., q w. III. Sponsler
and Seibert for Plaintiff; Barnett for
Defendant.
Jacob II. King vs.. Franklin Spots.
This was an action to recover for brick
furnished by Plaintiff to Defendant and
which Defendant alleged were not the
kind and quality he had contracted for
and therefore refused payment.-Verdict
for Plaintiff, for $239.34. Barnett for
Plaintiff; w. A., & w. H. Sponsler for
Defendant.
Y This was the longest Session of Court
ever held in Perry County, being in con-
tinuance Is days. The cost for Jurors
during the term was $l498.2S. A very
large number of cases were disposed of
and much business was transacted..~