The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1897-01-12
FIRST DAY IN THE
REMODELED ROOMS
County Court House in Use Again AT.
ter Being Repaired.
TWO SESSIONS OF COMMON PLEA:
Judge Edwards Holds That SpccuIa-
ing in Margins is Gambling and a
Judgment Note Given to Protect a
Margin is Not n Bona Eide Debt.
Wages Can BE Attached for Wages.
Other Doings ofa Busy Day in the
Court of Rules.

wages Can BE Attached for Wages.
Other Doings ola Busy Day in the
Court of Rules.
After an absence of nearly six months
court yesterday returned to the county
temple of justice and assumed its sit
tinGs in the main court room and old
No. ., Judge Edwards presiding in No.
l. and Judge Archibald in the other.
1t was the beginning of the January
term of common pleas which will con-
tinue three weeks. Judges Archibald.
Gunster and Edwards came on the
bench at o'clock and sat hearing mo-
tions and the like until II o'clock when
Judge Gunster retired and the trial of
civil cases was begun.
The following We're continued: John
HuntZman against George f. Barber,
Isaac h. Felts against Delaware, Lack
awanna and Western Railroad COM
pany; Ackerman Brothers against ID.
e II. Canal company; Winton Coal
company, limited, against Pancoast
Coal company. William Won Storch
against C. S. Won Storch. Emory G.
Ehrgood against Moscow Water COM
pany, Frank Wells against city of Car
against Mary Zeidler ct al, Henry May
against city of Scranton.
The following cases We're reported
settled: r. Badders, administrator vs.
Warren Stevens: Walter Burke VS..
Dickson Brewing company; John Han
Ion VS.. Johnson Coal company; Lewis
r. Bevan vs. Johnson Coal company;
w. Nj. Finn VS.. NJ. j. Norton.
VERDICT FOR DEFENDANT.
Judge Edwards directed a verdict
for the defendant in the case of A. +.
Campbell against Dr. William Hag-
gerty. The suit was brought on a 5000
judgment note which the defendant
gave to protect stock bought on mar
gin in Linn, Allen & Co.'S broker Of
flee. Court held that it was a gamb-
ling debt.
The case of John II. Elvey against c.
| l.. Teeter was called before Judge Ed
wards ElVey is suing for $135 for lay
| ing stone sidewalks in Green Ridge.
! Teeter alleges that the work was done
for the Teeter Stone company and that
they and not he should be made de-
fendant. Boyle and Beale appeared
for the plaintiff and Mr.. Scragg and
Huslander & Vosburg for the defense.
Just before adjournment the case of
Mrs. NJ. j. Lesh, of Milwaukee, against
the Hay Boot and Shoe company was
called before Judge Edwards. The
company seized through the sheriff
on an execution against her husband
| quantity of goods which she claims
belong to her personally. Hulslander
& Vosburg are for the plaintiff and Mr.
| TOrrey for the defense.
Peter j. COnrOy'S suit for wages
against Kaufhold Bros. was tried be-
fore Judge Archibald. NJ. j. Donahoe
represented the plaintiff and Patterson
& Wilcox the defense. COnroy earned
$41.4O working for the defendant. He
was sued for wages and half the
amount was attached. The defense
claims they not only paid it over but
that Conroy advised them to. He de-
MED this and his attorney also held
that wages cannot be attached for
wages. A verdict for the defendant
was rendered.
VERDICT AGAINST LAMEREAUX.
A verdict in favor of the defendant
was also found in the case of Alison
Hoel and wife against S. w. Lamer-
eauX, which was tried before Judge
Archibald. The Hoels We're engaged
to take care of LamereauXs farm.
Mrs. Hoel claims $54 for her services,
alleges that LamereauX agreed to pay
her extra for whatever work she did
outside of her household duties. WASH
ing milk cans and helping to care for
the COWS is the extra work she claimed
compensation for.
ON account of the non-appearance
of the plaintiff a verdict for the de-
fendant was directed in the case OF
Lewis r. Bevan against Thomas G.
Watkins. The amount of the claim
was $25.63. Mr.. Manning appeared fol
the defendant.
Judgment for the plaintiff was en-
tered in the wage case of II. BadderS
administrators, against Warren SteV-
ems. In the case of H. S. Jacobs and
Elizabeth Beach against the city OF
Scranton for damages, judgment to the
amount of $500 was entered in favor
of Mrs. Beach and the case CT Mr.
, Jacobs was ordered on the list
February 3 was fixed as the time fol
taking depositions in the divorce case.
OF Charles Evans against Mary Evans
and Elvira Jones against Richard r
Jones. In the case of Mary E,ngl.
against E. e. Ilngle deposition will 5t
-, taken February 3.
James Woolsey was directed to file I
bill of particulars in the divorce pro
l ceedings against his wife and also re
| Qured to show cause why he shoult
not support her pending the proceed
ings.
Because the verdict could not b
, reconciled with the evidence Judge I'D
l wards granted a new trial in the cas-
, OF the b. n. Mccoy Glass compan,
against the LackaWanna Hardwar
cCmpny.
In the case of Thomas G. Hopkin
against a. p. O'Donnell, judgment wa
Il refused.
In the assignment of \. C. Meyer
for the benefit of creditors the repor
v Of Walter f.. Gunster, esq, auditor, wa
[ confirmed cOnditionally.
+ In the case of the Star Advertsin,
- company against the West New Yorl
r Preserve and Manufacturing company
= the sheriff is directed to sell perishabl
q property
q A rule was granted in the case of Mi
e chael j. Clarke against Edward j. Fal
:, Ion TO show cause why the satisfaction
a entered inadvertently should not b
stricken off.
In the case of Leonard against Leon
ard a receiver was allowed to sell tn
5 book accounts.
! In the case of Hurley against tn
Delaware and Hudson Canal compan
court allowed a continuance of the rul
and injunction until the last Monda