The pioneer express. [volume] (Pembina, Dakota [N.D.]) 1883-1928, 1895-02-15

clatmed malice, etc. 10 thelGs com.
plant, but afterward chsngesl 20 act
ual damage and expense BY false. i'm.
prisonment through Infornlalities aud
technicalitics Gin the qualifications
Of the justice and constable, and the
technical insufiiclency Of tho com.
platnt. The court ruled that.the Jus.
tice was Justice all right, but that
the defence had failed to produce aud
prove the constablcs' qualification.
The court also ruled that tho com.
platnt aud warrant were not admissi.
BILE rs evidence on technical grounds
Of insufficiepcy. hence the Jury had
only the question Of actual damages
to assess and to determine a. tawhom
Of the defendants they should be as
sessed, and how much to each. The
case was full Of law techpicalities,
many Of them very close, aud some Of
q novel aspect. To the general pub.
lie, perhaps the most interesting dc.
cisdn was, that Justice should be
sure he Is justice, and u constable
be equally sure that he is a constable
before they attempt to issue and serve
legal process, and that Complaints
should be full and clear, and warrants
be read to persons arrested.
The jury spent several hours before
thay could agree, and FINALLY. agreed
upon a verdict 0fel against Gordon.
Stack and Kneeshaw for plaintiff.
Young & Monnet for defendant.
Greenwood vs. Greenwood, divorce
case. Continued on payment of $50.
alimony. -, u
First National Bank OF Wayerly vs.
T. r. Mclaughlin: G. w. Benjamin
and severn! others. Suit on 'promis.
sorry notes, for stallion. Defendants
bought a stallion from E.. Knott &
Co, Waverly, Iowa. The stallion
proved Of NO value as foal gettcr,
and was returned. Knott s Co, fur.
nished another stallion to two Of the
defendants in place Of the first.
which was also returned. Meantime
E. KNOTT & Co. sold notes TO Wayer.
~ Bank, who sue. The note con.
tanned clause for an attorneys fee.
1t was held by the court to be non.
negotiable, and the plaintiffs were
therefore subject t. terms OF con.
tract. On the trial though it was
shown that agents had made
verbal representations and warrants
which were false, yet there was a
printed warrant signed by the dc.
PENDANTS, which took precedence.
The jury, very much against their in.
clinations, rendered a verdict for
81 1882 against the defendants. The
case was very intricate us to Law
points, and under the rulings and
charge as given by the Judge, it was
hardly possible for them to decide
otherwise. It is the oft repeated
story Of the glib tongue of a sales
man, whose authority us agent /,
denied by the firm and who stand or
a printed warrant furnished at the
time of the delivery Of the good.
when they are called into court
Another case arIsing.out of the pur
chase OF the second horse is on tho
calendar. In the case reported
Young & Monnet were for plaintiff.
and Kneeshaw for defendants.
State vs. Goodman, Keller and Nc
Donald. Suit ON bond for appearance
at last term Of court, Goodman no,
appearlng. Defence that bond wa.
irregular and did not cover the an
pearance. Defence ovcr.ruled and
jury directed to give verdict fol
$500 and interest. 60 days stay Of pro
cecdings granted. N. G. Youne
states attorney, W. j. Kneeshaw fo]
defendants.
A divorce case was held last wcel
In the evening. Landsverk VS.. Land
sverk. The defendant husband no
appearing. Judgment not yet rem
dered. A. L. Miller for plaintiff.
The following cases have been add
ed to the calendar.
No. 1O1. Ruston vs.. Heller.
No. 1O2. Carlson vs.. Diamond.
No. lO3. Towle va. McCauley ct .
No. l0a. McMaster vs.. Heller.
No. los. Clark vs.. Heller.
Sarah Benjamin vs. A Longtin
Plaintiff was driving in Il buggy alon,
the highway. dog belonging to de
PENDANT ran out aud frightened tn.
horse which run away throwing oul
the plaintiff, breaking her arm ant
otherwise injuring her A large
number Of witnesses were heard OF
both sides, mostly in reference Il
whether the horse was of a skittist
nature aud unsafe to drive. and also
as to whether the dog was of u viciou.
nature and habitually ran aftel
horses. Verdict for plaintiff, for $5Ot
and costs. Young & Monnet for plain
till. E. W.Conmy for defenda mt.
Another suit, Orr vs. Longtin fol
damages to horse and buggy is on the
calendar for trial. arising from the
same runaway. 80
A. McPhail vs.. ]. Typka, suit fol
wages, the payment Of which was
guaranteed by defendant. Verdict
for plaintiff. Laxdal & Burke fol
plaintiff. w. B. IIauser for defend.
ant.
McManis vs.. O'Connor. Settled BY
stipulation.
W. W. Reylock VS. George Roadhouse
and John Miller. Reylock had q
bankrupt stock of goods ut Neche,
Roadhouse as assessor, assessed the
stock Of goods for taxation. Miller
as constable undera warrant from the
county treasurer seized the stock.
Roadhousc accompanied the con.
stable;,goods we're seized and store
closed for four days. Reylock then
paid the taxes, some $1,000 and re.
sumed business. The SUIT was for
81 900 damages Verdict for plaintiff
for 800.