The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1898-06-04
OPINIONS OF JUDGE LOVE
Five OF Them We're Filed With Pro.
thonOtary Copeland Yesterday.
Cases tie Passed Upon.

Judge John G. Love, of Bellefonte.
sent to Prothonotary Copeland yester-
day opinions in five cases tried before
him in this court, The opinions are on
applications for new trials. He refus-
ed new trial in the suit of Thomas II.
Kelley and Elizabeth Kelley, his wife,
against the Scranton Railway COM
pany; case of the Mccoy Glass COM
pSny versus the Lackawanna Hard
ware company; case of Uriah NCDon-
nell against the Scranton Railway COM
pany; and in the case of James +. Boyle
against +. f. Boyle, executor. He re-
fused to strike off the nOn-sut in the
case Of George Lowry against the Lack
awanna Valley Rapid Transit company.
In the Kelley case, Mrs. Kelley was
injured getting on a Stone avenue
street car. The jury returned a verdict
of Sl,3j0 The principal reason for a
new trial was that the verdict was
against the weight of the evidence.
The opinion says the case was one for
the jury, and the verdict was not an
excessive one if the plaintiff was en-
titled to recover at all.
In the Mcdonnell case the jury gave
a verdict of SIC in favor of the plaintiff
for damage done to his property in the
First ward by the change in the grade
of the street. The work was done by
the company, and not pursuant to a
resolution by the city councils. The
court reserved the point that under the
evidence the verdict should have been
for the defendant, but upon full con-
sideration of all the merits of the case
the verdict is allowed to stand.
In the Boyle case the verdict was for
81 100, which was based upon the claim
of one years salary and two-thirds of
$500 insurance money. Judge Love says
that while there were ten witnesses fol
the plaintiff and but one for the de-
fendant, vet the preponderance of evi.
dence of the former is not so great. But
there having been really two trials with
recovery for the plaintiff in each case
he is OF the opinion that the verdict
should stand.
In the Lowry case the plaintiff was
suing for injuries ne sustained on De
cember s, 1895, by being struck by a cal
on Belmont street, Carbondale. on tbs
trial Judge Love granted a non-suit or
the ground of contributory negligence
The evidence, he said, showed that the
plaintiff failed to make use of his nat
ural seIses as a prudent man under the
circumstances should or would do anC
| was clearly guilty of negligence and il
not entitled to recover.
Furthermore, there was no negli
gcnce. he said, shown on the part of tht
company. He thinks the case comes
clearly within the principles decided il
the recent case of Lizzie Gilmartir
against the same company. Therefore
the non suit is allowed to remain.
In the Mccoy Glass case the actor
was founded upon an account for {
| balance due. claimed by the plaintiff
| for two invoices of glass shipped by th'
| plaintiff to defendants. The latter re
ceived the glass, but set up as a de
| fense that it was shipped in pursuance
| of a contract that the plaintiff faile(
| to comply herewith, in consequence o
which the defendants We're forced t.
go into the open market to supply thei
| trade, and they claimed as a set off t
| the plaintiffs suit. damages for the eX
! tra price they had to pay for the glass
! The jury found verdict of $52j,l5 70
the plaintiff. Judge Love thinks tn
case was fairly tried and the verde
should stand.