The herald., 1897-07-28
An Old Fruit Growers Case
Being Retired
THE DAMAGES LAID AT $1,000
SPECIAL COUNSEL APPOINTED
FOR BABY CREEDE
Additional Complications in the
Montariol Case-A Husband
Suing His Wife

A suit yesterday came to trial in de-
partment six before Judge Allen and a
jury that will be of interest to fruit
growers generally, and to those propos-
ing to set out their land to fruit trees
in particular.
The suit is one originally brought by
H. A. Ford against J. j. Bushard' and
Joseph Mesmer, but shortly after the
case was filed the plaintiff died. In
July, 1894, the action was revived and
continued by the insertion of Carrie E.
Ford as the plaintiff, and in January,
1895, the case came to trial. A verdict
for $4,000 and costs, the latter amounting
to $24920, was returned in favor Of the
plaintiff but a new trial was accorded,
and in that way the case is again in
court.
The plaintiffs-Ford and his wife
were owners of thirty acres of orange
land in the town of Fullerton, and in
September, 1890, applied TO the defend
ant Bushard for the purchase from him
of carload of orange trees of three and
four years old roots of one and two years
old buds, to be over three feet high and
the carload to contain not less than 1900
or more than 1000 trees OF these 500
were to be Mediterranean Sweets and
the remainder Washington navels; all
trees to be guaranteed good budded
stock and in good growing condition.
The price to be paid, as stipulated in the
contract drawn up, was 60 cents for
each tree delivered at Anaheim station,
less cost of transportation, and were to
be delivered before April l. 1891.
In pursuance of this agreement en-
tered into Bushard made delivery on
March Is, 1891, at Fullerton of one car
load of nursery stock orange trees; that
is to say, 1000 young trees, and the sum
of 5000 was paid to him as the balance
outstanding on the total amount of $1,000
due for the consignment.
In the spring of the same year the nur-
sery stock was set out and cared for by
the ordinary methods followed by grow
ers generally, al a cost it is claimed, of
SIS per acre. In 1894 nearly all of the
trees bore fruit, but not of the varieties
represented by Bushard, but of some I'M
known and worthless kind. The plain
tiffs, it is claimed had 10 knowledge and
no opportunity to discover that the stock
supplied was not of the varieties stipu-
lated for and relied upon the warranty
OF the defendant. Plaintiffs also claim
that the trees supplied were worth not
over 21a cents per tree, while the value
of nursery stock orange trees of the
kind, variety and quality of those con-
tracted for was 81 per tree; that in the
spring of 1894 the value of the lands
with the trees upon it was worth 5000 per
acre, and the value of the lands with
trees upon it of the variety, kind and
quality contracted for was worth double
the amount, or $500 per acre.
For the loss of crop for the years 1884
and general damages the plaintiffs
claimed and Carrie Ford now claims
$1,000
The plaintiff is represented in the case
by Messrs. James and Montgomery,
while for the defendants appear Isidor
Dockweiler and Attorney Murphy.
The following gentlemen were selected
as jurymen to try the case: C. c. Bon
NELL c. w Earl, A. Hinckley, ]. D.
Lamb Oscar Macy, Edwin Munsey, J.
r. McManis, A. Osgoodby, r. R. Smith,
G. Taylor, j. H. Vestal and John Zim-
norman.
The further hearing will be continued
today.