The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1895-06-13
String ON The VERDICT
1t Was Returned in Case Of Mccarthy
Against Scanlon Estate.
VERDICT IN FAVOR OF BISSELL
Allowed tho Full Amount of His Claim
with ntercst-CounOlly Ejcctment
Case cforc Judge ScnrIc for Trial.
TOwnscn -Cariuccl Case Still On.

When court opsned yesterday morn
ing Attorney Joseph O'Brien resumed
his closing address to the jury In the
main court room in the case of M. A.
Mccarthy, Of Ashley, against Margaret
Scanlon, Administrative of the estate
of Martin Scanlon, deceased. After
Judge Gunster had delivered his charge
the jury retired and later in the day
brought in the following verdict:
We find that Martin Scanlon in his life
time on July 10, 1898. executed and deliv-
cred to NJ. A. Mccarthy. the plaintiff In
this case a promissory judgment note un-
der SEAL that said Martin Scanlon died In
May, 1892, and that letters of adm!nistra-
tion upon his estate were duly Issued by
the register Of wills Of Lackawanna coun-
ty. to Margaret Scanlon, the present de-
fendant; that said note was given by said
Scanon without any consideration and
for the purpose of hindering and delaying
creditors of said Scanlon and that there
was no evidence on the part OF the plain
tiff to show that said note was given with
out any consideration or for the purpose
of hlndering and delaying condition.
Left TO the Court.
We ore ignorant in point OF law upon
which side we ought. upon these facts
to find the issue. If upon the whole mat
ter the court shall be of opinion that the
issue is proved for the plaintiff, we find
for the plaintiff accordingly. for Che sum
of Sl,4l5 being the amount of the debt and
interest of said note. But II the court Is
of an opposite opinion then we find in IA
vor Of the defendant.
Immediately after the Mccarthy case
went to the jury the case OF James
Gethings against the Scanlon estate
was put on trial. The action is for the
purpose of collecting sum of money
which Gethings, who is a resident OF
the West Side, alleges is due him by
the estate. When court adjourned
practically all the testimony in the case
had been heard. AS in the Mccarthy
case Attorneys O'Brien & Kelly appear
for the plaintiff and Attorneys Watson
& Zimmerman and +. J. Fitzsimmons
for the defendant.
Verdict for BisscIl & Co.
Before Judge Searle yesterday morn
ing the case of E. Bissell & Co., of
New York, against Henry Battin &
Co., was resumed. The plaintiffs sought
to recover $769.72 with interest, the
value of hardware furnished to- Battin
e. Co. The defense was that Bissell
& Co. had agreed to grant an extern
sion of credit but the evidence led the
jury to believe that the acts of the
defendants put it out of their power to
claim the benefit of this extension of
credit, and returned verdict in favor
of the plaintiffs for $S6263.
The next case called before Judge
Searle was owen Connolly, of Minooka
| against j. S. jenkins and Thomas Shan
non. an action in ejectment to obtain
possession of a house and lot in Spring
Brook, valued at $500. Attorneys John
F. Murphy, John F. Scragg and A. A.
Vosburg represent Mr.. Connolly, and
Attorney L. C. Newcomb the defend
ants. After the case had been opened
and the PLAINTIFFS were Offering papers
to prove title defect was discovered
in one Of the conveyances and Mr.
Connolly's attorneys pleaded surprise
and asked for a continuance The con-
tinuance was refused but Judge Searle
adjourned court until today to allow
the defect to be remedied.
Townsend. Carlucci Case.
Yesterday morning the case Of w. C.
Townsend against Frank Carlucci &
Brother was again taken up and con.
tinued to occupy the attention Of the
court until 1890, when court was ad.
journed to enable Judge Edwards tc
attend the afternoon session of the
Wilkes-Barre eisteddfod. The case will
probably go to the jury today.