The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1897-06-18

The jury in the Replogle-Frothing-
ham case after being out nearly five
hours returned a verdict yesterday af-
ternoon in favor of the plaintiff. While
It agreed with Mr.. Replogle that he
had been injured 1t did not exactly
agree with his estimate OF the damages
done. Their difference of opinion is
$9,925, Mr.. Replogle claiming $4,000
and the jury allowing SIS.
Mr.. Replogle is not at all satisfied
with the finding and will to-day pro-
ceed to secure a new trial. Mr.. Froth-
ingham on the other hand, Is tickled
beyond measure over the result After
the verdict was known Mr.. Frothing-
ham approached Mr.. Replogle and
said: You can take that seventy-five
out of the one hundred and twenty
five you owe me and I'll agree to spend
the other fifty in a blow out for the
court, jury, lawyers and newspaper
men," Mr.. Replogle made no reply.
The cause of Mr.. rockingham 8
| high spirits Is found in the fact that
had the verdict been for 500 or more
| he could have been imprisoned for
sixty DAYS in case he failed to settle.
| AS it is now he can declare himself in
| solvent and tell Mr. Replogle to whistle
| for his award.
In the case of Mrs. Ellen ODonnell
| against Charles du Pont Breck the
| jury returned a verdict of $S45.2S In
| favor of the plaintiff which is the full
| amount of the claim with interest. A
new trial was forthwith applied for by
Mr.. Comegys, attorney for the defend
| ant.
JONES AGAINST MACKEY.
Two new cases were called for trial
yesterday morning. Before Judge Ed
wards in the main court room John w.
| Jones is seeking to recover 1866 from
bis sisters-in-law, Lille M. and Lizzie
| E. Mackey for services rendered in the
construction of a building for them
| S. B. Price represents the plaintiff.
Hon. w. w. Watson and George
Mackey, of Slatington, appear for the
| defense.
| Before Judge Searle was heard the
case of Edward Thayne. against the
| Scranton Traction company. He
claims $1,000 for injuries received in a
! collision between two cars, near the
| power house on the Providence line,
| Jan. 5, 1895. Thayne was standing on
the rear platform when the accident
| occurred. The force OF the collision
| threw him against a projecting handle
| bar and, he says, he is now afflicted
with q. lame back and permanent blad-
| der trouble.
| The company's defense was that
there was plenty of room inside the
| car and by taking the extra risk Of
riding on the platform Thayne was
guilty of contributary negligence.
The case went to the jury at adjourn
ing time. OBrien and Kelly represent
ed the plaintiff and Horace e. Hand
and /. H. Burns the defendant.
A good part of the time in the Won
Storch case yesterday was consumed
in wrangling over the admission Of
records of the Luzerne courts. They
were finally ruled out and Prothono-
tary Llewllyn and Deputy Register Of
| Wills Roderick had their journey for
nought.
TENANT BY SUFFRAGE.
Isaac Reichardt, William Conyn-
CHAM, William Love and Major Fish
| gave evidence to show that Curing
ton Won Storch was tenant by suf-
frage on Williams property and that
William always controlled and super
vised the place. Fred Won Storch, of
Yonkers, identified the signature of
Mrs. Ellen Sawyer and others of the
heirs of Ferdinand on the paper. in
which they declared they had no equi-
table or other title in the disputed
land. Mrs. Sawyer on a previous oc-
casion repudiated the paper and re-
fused to acknowledge the signature
purporting to be hers to be genuine.
There is a possibility that the case
may be finished this week, but Il is
only a possibility. In all likelihood 1t
| will go over into next week.
A rule for new trial was refused
by Judge Edwards in the case of Pas
| qualie Gellotti and A. Gellotti against