Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1896-03-19

Kelley VS.. Fred Downing and the jury
went over at 2:30 d. M
The jury returned verdict in the case
OF Montpelier Hardware company vs.
Mary H. Springer for the plaintiff to re-
cover sllGG and costs.
In Washington County Court, in the
case of John II. Kelley vs. Fred Downing.
the jury after being out an hour returned
verdict for the plaintiN.
In the case of Grace I. Parker VS.. Tay-
Tor o. Parker. a jury was empanelled at
zl0 y. IN. This was an action brought in
asumpsit to recover $500 which the plain
TIN claims was left in trust by a relative
for hor. When the case was called up the
counsel for the defendant suggested 20 the
court that the case should have beca
Drought in another court and that assump-
sit would not lie in a case of this kline
inc court ruled that In their opinion the
case should have been brought I'm q court
or equity. but the counsel for the plaintiff
insisted on introducing his evidence and
ne was allowed by the court to present it;
subject to the exceptions Of the counsel
for defendant. The plaintiff introduced
evidence tending TO show that the defend
ant ola receive the sum set forth in the
declaration, but the court held that as
| sumpsit would not lie In court of law,
ana that the suit should have been brought
Ill court of equity, and ordered the jury
to return verdict for the defendant. J.
+. Lamson for plaintiff, John Gordon and
William Lord for defendant.
w H. buchanan VS.. b. y. Cook and
w. y. Whitcomb. and w L. Whitcomb,
trustee. This is an action brought to re-
cover 320c.22 from tho defendant for taxes
that accrued in the year 1894 in the town
| of Barre against the defendant. The de-
| PENDANT claims that at the time the tax
was set 20 his name in Barre, he was a
| resident of Berlin, and therefore he is not
/ nj n Y1,.
| ped all the forenoon in presenting his
| side OF the case. The court took u recess
| until Monday afternoon. In the above
| case John Gordon and w. w. Lapoint APP
pear fer plaintiff, and $. C. Shurtleff for
| defendant.
| In the case of r. s. Clark VS.. John
McAuley, apt, the judgment of City Court
was affirmed with interest and costs, by
the Washington County Court.
| Tho arguments in the case of w. H.
! buchanan VS. D. y. Cook and w. A. Whit
comb and w. L. whitcomb, trustees. oc~
fcupied Monday afternoon and the Judge
requested the jury to como I'm at S:4j Tues
day morning and receive the charge,
| and was given the case at 9:15 a. IN. At 2
p. m. they returned a verdict for the
/ plaintiff. to recover the amount claimed
and costs.
The court looked over the cases set for
trial and found several that had dropped
out. Among those reported was the case
of David w. Aldrich vs.. Hugh McNulty.
The case to remain open with the condition
that If the defendant fails to comply with
the terms Of settlement. which are that
he pay to plaintiff $50 and costs, during
the term. and If not. plaintiff to have
judgment for the amount specified with
certified execution.
| In the case of Lewis Sassie vs. Joseph
Bianchi apt, judgment of the Justice
Court was affirmed with interest and
wit nt, tn, t1,l
Tho case of Dustin &; Kelley VS.. Frank
Burke and Granite Savings Bank. trustee,
was reported settled and discontinued
Tho case OF Williams and Mills VS.. NJ.
+. Rice, apt, and National bank of Barre.
and j. W. Linton, trustees Judgment OF
the lower court was affirmed with interest
aud cost.
The case of IT. I. Cheney VS.. Coburn and
Jones. apt. was reported settled and dis
: continued.
AS there were no cases ready for trial
the court took n recess until . p. m.
In the afternoon the court took up the
case OF d. s Fuller e Son VS.. William Sell
lers, apt. This Is an action in trover
for a moving machine. The plaintiff
claims that the defendant induced him,
through false representations. to sell him
a moving machine and take his note for
the same. The plaintiff is presenting his
r side of the case. II. r. Gordon appears
l for the plaintiff and ]. p. Lamson for the
defendant.
In the County Court the case of Eliza
. beth T.. Standish vs.. Fred A. Standsh
was taken up. This case is a petition for
1 divorce. a bill was granted for intoler-
, able severity and also n right to resume
= her maiden name. William Lord appear
, ed for the petitioner and f. P. Carleton
= for the defendant
5 The arguments in the case of H. s. Full
Ter & Son VS.. William Sellers apt, occu-
pied nearly all the forenoon yesterday and
the case was given to the jury at $3.50 p. M
After being out II minutes they delivered
/, q verdict for the defendant and that he
recover his costs. IT. r. Gordon appeared
for the plaintiff and j. p. Lamson for the
, defendant
= The defendants counsel in the case OF
Jessie Frasier vs. Home Life Insurance
vcompany, presented n demurrer TO the
plaintiffs declaration. which was sustain
! ed by the court and consequently the
: case will not be heard. John Gordon APP
pcared for the plaintiff and Dillingham;,
Rowland and Huse for the defendant
In the case OF Christophu Christinson vs..
Edwin Carleton, apt, n jury was empan-
eled at 2:45 y. m. and the case Is now
, being heard. The action is for debt in
! award. Hoar and Scott for the plaintiff
and Barney and Martin fol the defendant