Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1894-06-14
COUNTY COURT.
Judgment Given South burlington in Its
Suit Against Worcester.

Laughlin of Boston, had been fully paid by |
the defendant to Mr.. Mclaughlin and that |
he afterward, in order to dcfraud the de- |
fendant, tranferred the notes to Hezokiah |
Mclaughlin, for whom the suit was insti !
tuted. The plaintiff claimed that the sale |
between the McLaughlins was bona flde
one. w. l.. Burnap and j. j. Enright APP
peared for the plaintiff and d. j. Foster for
the defendant.
The jury case Of Mrs. Julia A. Sheldon
VS.. Michael Enright was then called and a
jury empaneled. Mrs. Sheldon charges Mr..
Enright, (l) with breaking into her house
and carrying away certain personal prop
erty, ,and ~ with assault upon her person.
Damages are set at $500. Mr.. Enright en-
ters general denial to the charges and
claims that he had right to tako
the property because of chattel
mortgage which he had thereon.
The deposition of Mrs sheldon, the plain
tiff, was read. Mrs. Tyler, her sister, Mrs.
Dr. Briggs, Mrs Ira F. Joyner and Robert
Mclaughlin testified in behalf of the plain
tiff and J. II. Donlin, another witness for
the plaintiff, was ON the stand when court
ad dOurned for the night
The case of Julia \. Sheldon against
Michael Enright occupied the day in County
Court Thursday. Mr. ]. H. Donlin's ex
animation was completed, after which Mr..
George D. Wright manager of the Venetian
Blind company, testified. After Miss Car
rie Sheldon, daughter # the plaintiff, had
given her testimony, the plaintiff rested.
City Constable John Z. Lavelle was the
defendant first witness. Before he was
cross-eXanined DR.. j. Y. Oliver was put on
the stand and asked a few questions At
the conclusion of Mr.. Laveles testimony
L I1,l...
Roberts and j. \. Brown appear for the
plaintiff and Hons. Henry Ballard and W,
l.. Burnap and j. j. Enright for the defend
ant
County Court reassembled at the usual
| hour Friday morning and the trial of the
case of Julia \. Sheldon vs.. Michael En-
right was resumed. The defendant took
the witness stand. His examination occu-
pied about two hours. Michael McCabe, a
carter and w. r. Cassidy, a clerk for Mr..
Enright, also testified after which the
defendant rested. In rebuttal the
plaintiff called ex-Constable j. T. Lavelle
and recalled Miss Sheldon, each of whom
was asked only a question or two. In re
buttal the defendant answered one inquiry
At II 30, the evidence being all in, the legal
questions in the case We're taken up and
discussed. Mr. Roberts asked the court to
direct a verdict for tho plaintiff for the
value Of tho furniture tahen from her, on the
ground that Mr.. Enright's entry
into the house was unlawful,
and the court so held. This left the simple
question of damages to be submitted to the
jury Counsel then began the arguments,
each side being limited to an hour and a
half. Hon Daniel Roberts opened for the
plaintiff. He spoke for - minutes, the
jury, members of the bar and court giving
him close attention. Lawyers Ballard and
Burnap followed with arguments in behalf OF
the defendant and Mr.. Robert Robert,
closed with a short plea for the plaintiff
Judge Rowell charged the Jury immediate
ly, directing them TO return verdict fol
the plaintiff for the actual value of the fur
niture Mr.. Enright took and, if they foun(
that he assaulted the plaintiff, as alleged
for such exemplary damages as they consid
cred just. The jury retired at & O'Clock, re
, naming out about an hour and a half
finding the defendant guilty as allege,
, and reporting verdict of $40
, in favor of the plaintiff, 800 as the value o
the furniture taken and $3l0 damages 70
, injuries to her consequent upon the assault
The defendant will carry the case to tn
Supreme Court on exceptions Court thel
, ad djourned until p. m, Monday
| County Court reassembled at , p. m
1 Monday. The case of the town of Sout
Burlington against the town of Worceste
was Immediately taken up. 1t is one of
series of three cases relating to the sup
| port of Daniel Durfey, late of South Bur
/ lingtOn, who some years ago, Will
4 living in the town of Worcester, wa
, made n helpless cripple by an acciden
: while Telling trees. The town of Worceste
y contracted with Milo Durfey, his father, TO
t his support, agreeing to pay him 50 pc
D week therefor for definite length of time
1 as Milo claimed, and for an indefinite leugt
Y | of time as the defendant town claimed
- Before the expiration of that contract Mil
n moved his family, including the pauper sol
: to South Burlington whore he continued t
= support the son until the expiration, as h
o thought, of the contract. Then tho tow
h declined to take Daniel off his hand
b and Milo continued to support him under a
b implied contract, as he claims, and brougl
Q suit to recover therefor, which suit is sti
pending. At Milo's death, which occurre
s in 1890, South Burlington was called upo
|, to provide for Daniels support and did s.
II claiming that inasmuch as Daniel had bee
: supported in South Burlington by the tow
Sc of Worcester ho was u transient in Sout
II Burlington and that Worcester W.
|
Burlington then took steps to mai
o Worcester reimburse it for Daniel supper
% SO this suit was brought to recover $6l|
/ including interest, to which expense
5 claimed it has been. Daniel, tho paupe
L died in 1893.
ID In County Court Tuesday d. j. Fost
Is argued the case of the town of South Blu
1t lington VS. town of Worcester to the jury f
A. the plaintiff and $. c. Shurtlelf of Montpt
lie Ter spoke for tho defendant Nudge Row,
r occupied some 20 minutes instructing Il
rs jury as to the law pertaining TO the issu
in which was submitted to them in three que
g, tions, defendant concedinS that the plai
n till was entitled to recover the sum clail
Mt ed if entitled to recover at a
Retiring at 1850, the jury remained o
or nearly two hours, returning verdict
OF favor of the plaintiff, to which town t
&. court gave judgment for the amount of
n claim, S6lS, with costs. The defendant h
exceptions noted and will take the case
the Supreme Court.