The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1898-01-14
LACKAWANNA DAY
In SUPERIOR COURT
Seven Local Common Pleas Appeals
Were Argued.
GREAT VARIETY OF QUESTIONS
An Appellate Court, for the First
Time,s Called Upon to Interpret the
Much Disputed constables' Bill.
That Rulings Made in the Days OF
& Horse Cars DO Not Fit Questions
Relating to Electric Cars Is In
stauced in the Thayne Case.

Relating TO Electric Cars IL In
stauced in the Thayne Case.
Seven Lackawanna cases were ar
gued before the Superior court yester-
day: Edward Griffin, appellant against
Bernard Davis; Michael Reap against
the city of Scranton, appellant; Rich
ard Barron against the county of
Lackawanna, appellant; Gilmore q
Duffy against Margaret A. Dunleavy,
appellant; Bixler & Carrell against j.
b. Lesh, appellant; Ellen O'Donnell
against Charles du Pont Breck, APP
pellant Edward Thayne against the
Scranton Traction company, appellant
In the Grifiin-DaVis case the action
resulted from the neglect or refusal Of
Davis in his capacity of constable to
serve writ placed in his hands by
the plaintiff. Griffin sued for the dam
ages that resulted from this neglect,
but was defeated The defense was
that after Davis refused to serve the
writ the plaintiff placed it in the hands
of Constable Coles and that Coles is
the one who should he proceeded
against. James Mahon appeared for
Griffin, and Nosburg q Dawson for
Davis.
The Reap case grows out Of the sei2-
ure by the city of portion of the plain
tiffs Land on West Market street. T..
i. Blewitt, then city engineer gave
lines to Anthony knight, a contractor,
for fOOt-hridge over Leach's creek.
The lines transgIessed Reap's land and
the latter opposed the citys seizule.
He took it to court and viewers award
ed him $500 An appeal was taken, but
when il came to trial Reap elected to
take a voluntar! nOn-suit and proceed
against the city for damages. The issue
now is whether or not Reap lost his
claim by electing to take one form Of
action after IT had previously elected
to take another. NJ. A. Mckinley ap-
peared for the city and g. Comegys for
Reap.
CONSTABLES' FEE BILL.
The cOnstables' fee bill is the point
at issue in the Barron against the
county case. The county commission
ers want TO allow only 50 cents for
serving a subpoena, no matter how
many names ii contains. Judge Gun
ster decided that 50 cents should be
allowed for every name. This is the
first time an appellate court has been
called upon to interpret the law. The
lower courts are greatly at variance in
their reading of it. A strong point
made by Carpenter & FleitZ, attorneys
for the constables is that the law
reads 81 for the execution" of a war
rant and 80 cents for the Service" of
subpoena, and that the distinction
between execution" completed ac-
tion, and Service" which does not
necessarily imply entire fulfillment
was intentional by the Legislature
County Solicitor II. A. Knapp argued
for the appellant.
Hon. j. G. Vaughan argued for the
plaintiff and j. H. Torrey for the de.
fendant-a appellant in the case of Gill
more & Duffy against Mrs. A. Dun
leavy. Mrs. Dunleavy owed $3.50 to the
firm. After its dissolution, when she
was sued for the bill, she paid it to
Duffy, having knowledge. the plaintiffs
claimed, that Gilmore was the author.
lied receiver. Judge Edwards decided
that she had not discharged the debt
and that she would have TO settle with
Gilmore. The check is still uncollected
at the bank, it might be added.
The proper meaning of the word par
tial is the point at issue in the Lesf
case. He paid Bixler & Carrell in notes
on a bank account. They admitted that
the notes We're accepted in partial pay.
ment of the book account. Lesh in.
sists that therefore they have no right
to sue him for the account, notwith
standing that the notes are not negotia.
BILE. Bxler & Carrell hold that they
only took the notes as security anC
that Lesh was to redeem them. Vos.
q Inx 4
Warren & Knapp appeared for the APP
pellees.
O'DONNELL-BRECK CASE.
In the O'Donnell- Breck case the sui
was to recover $500 paid by the plain
tiff to the defendant. She claimed sht
gave it as part payment on property
which he said he could secure for her
lie alleged that It was given as
commission for services in securing tn,
property. He secured ii for her, bu
she refused to take II, saying that sh,
was told he was charging her 81 ,00
more than it could be bought for in thu
open market. He returned $24O afte
stormy interview.
She took it and it is claimed said sh,
would follow him for the rest of il
She did and secured judgment for tn,
full amount. The appeal was thel
taken by Breck on the ground that tn,
trial judge erred in his charge to tn
jury and in the admission Of certain
testimony. w. j. Hand appeared TO
the appellant and C. Comegys for tn
appellee.
Whether or not a passenger STANDING
on the rear platform Of an electric car
and who was injured In a collision, wa,
guilty of contributory negligence. wal
thH important question at issue in tn,
case of Thayne against the Traction
company Thayne and friend nam
ed McAvoy boarded Providence ca
IN the Genital city, McAvoy taking
seat inside and Thayne choosing t,
stand on the rear platform, although