Vermont phÅ“nix. [volume] (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1834-1955, 1898-03-18
wINDHAM COUNTY COURT.
Verdict for the Defendant In the Case of
Gregg VS.. WilIis--- Mrs. Josephine Ga lie
Receivers sIsI Prom Her Former IIus-


Gregg VS.. WIllis---M Josephine Ga ie
Receivers sIsI From Her Former uus-
band.
ARdrcr j. Gregg rs MdSd Willis
Action OF assulupsit The plaintiff in
| troduced i'm evidence note for $1,000
signed by the defendant, dated in June,
$780, and rested his case. The evidence
on the part of the defendant tended to
show that the note in question was Civ
en- for money borrowed OF the plaintiff by
the defendant to assist his son and one
| Carey who were carrying on business in
Bratlleboro under the name of the Thorn
Medicine company. That at the time de-
! tendant also gave plaintiff a western mott
| gage to hold as collateral security for the
| payment of the note That in August,
! lSVU, the defendant bought in to the CON
Germ, ana became an equal partner with
! young Wills and Carey, at the agreed
! price of $1,000. That said amount was to
be paid $500 in cash and the $1,000 by
surrendering the note in question to the
defendant. That he did surrender the
collateral security which he held and
! agreed to get the note, which he said was
in the hands of his wife, and surrender
that, but never did. That the Thorn
Medicine business did not prove remuner-
alive, and the plaintiff withdrew there
from within few months, and in Jan
uary, 1871, young Willis and Carey sold
out to parties in Fitchburg, Mass, and
hnally settled with their creditors for %
cents on the dollar.
Evidence was submitted showing that
The defendant was insane and unable to
! give his testimony, and thereby the plain.
Pun was precluded from testifyng in the
! mt fp,,Va . L..
animation of defendants witnesses it is
| evident that his answers would have been
that the defendant and young Willis and
| Carey misrepresented the business of the
| Thorn Medicine company and that he was
| fraudulenIy induced to purchase an in
terest in the concern, which was bank
rupt at the time, AMI that well known to
the defendant.
Verdict for the defendant. Fits and
Read Tor plaintiff, Waterman, Martin IL
Hit for defendant
Josephine W. Guic rs. Fret &. Gaie.-
This was an action of trover. The evil
dence on the part of the plaintiff tended to
show that she was divorced from defend
ant March 10, 1897, and that as a portion
OF her alimOny the court decreed to her all
the household furniture that had been in
use by them prior to their separation.
That the plaintiff had portion of il in her
own use and that the balance was stored
by her in the house and barn of Harry X.
Lawrence in Brattleboro. That from the
18th to the 2lst of March, 1897. the de-
PENDANT took said furniture from the prem.
lses OF Lawrence and removed it into New
Hampshire. That as soon as the plaintiff
learned that defendant had gotten posses
sion OF 1t, she caused her attorney to make
demand for its return, and on his refusal
caused this suit to be brought March IS.
1897. That the furniture so taken was
worth something like S22O
The defendant admitted the taking of
the furniture, but gave evidence tending to
show that the plaintiff gave it to him, say
ing she couldn't do anything with it. as il
had got to be removed from the premises
of Lawrence, and that he must take it and
take care of it and that he might have it.
Ihat the furniture SO taken by him was
worth from $50 TO 500 and no more.
The plaintiff denied that she ever gaye
the furniture TO him or told him that he
must take care of il.
Verdict for plaintiff, SlS4 ~ damages.
Fits and Haskins a Schwenk for the
plaintiff Waterman, Mirtin Il Hit for
the defendant.
GEO. d. Wheat cS. Torn Of Put,eu-
This was an action Of assumpsit brought
to recover for medical services rendered the
town. The plaintiff is a physician. and
his testimony tended to show that he was
employed at the instance of the overseer of
the poor, NJ. ID. Whitman, May Is, 1898.
to treat one Frank X. Knight, pauper.
That from that time he treated said knight
professionally, from time to time, up TO
and including Dec. IS, 1895, for which he
had charged SlO5. 80 and interest for two
years; that said Knight required medical |
attendance and his charges were reason
able.
The evidence on the part of the defend |
ant tended to show said Overseer did EN- |
ploy plaintiff to make the visit Nav u. |
1898, and again he authorized the plaintiff |
toturnsh knight medical aid July 10, 1894, |
but that Sept. :, 1894, the overseer believ- |
ing that the plaintiff was making too fire.
quent visits, notified him that the town |
would pay no further doctors bills on &C
count of Knight. That the doctor was not
employed further except to make knight |
two or three visits in January or February, |
1873, when he was i'll with the grip
Verdict for plaintiff to recover SlO3 o..
Waterman, Martin ~ Hit for the plain
II. Haskins II Schwenk for the defend
ant.
Grace L. Dir cS. Albert Potter anil
Frank N. MdSon.-This was an action
brought under the provisions of our civil
damage statute. The defendant Potter
did not appear.
The evidence on the part of the plaintiff
tended to show that the defendant Mason
leased his farm, live stock and farming
tools to the defendant Potter for the term
Of one year beginning April /, 1897, re.
serving to himself one barn and certain
portions of the dwelling house, the defend
ant Potter having the use of the balance.
Said farm and buildings are situate at the
south end of the Sawdaga pond in Whit
ngham. That in the afternoon of July Pc,
1897, the plaintiffs husband, Clarence +.
Dix, Clarence Plumb and Edgar Busby, all
young men, got into boat and rowed from
The north end of the pond over to the Ma
son farm and called on Potter for some
hing to drink; that he had none on the
premises, but at the request of the three
Ioung men he procured a two-gallon jug of
neighbor, took his team, rode OFF, was
L. 4