The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1898-03-22

JuuBc huHSleT yeSlCIuetS 'hai SSu
the grand jury, heard the returns of
the county constabulary and opened a
weeks session of equity court.
Nothing out of the ordinary was con-
tained in the charge. The jury re-
tired and at once began deliberatinG
on the cases that have accumulated
since the last session. The {. w.
Traver cases against twenty Scran-
tonans and eleven Carbondalians for
selling liquor without a license were
taken up during the afternoon
The jury is composed of NJ. D. Low
ern, Scranton, foreman; M. j. Burns,
Scranton; William Campbell, Scran-
ton; NJ. II. Carpenter, Scranton; Rob-
ern N. Carey, Scott; William Cusick,
Scranton; Thomas r. Davis, Scran-
ton; Evan c. Davis, Scranton; John
Caffney, Carbondale: Harry Gould,
Moscow; Douglass II. Jay, Scranton;
]. +. Kenyon, Greenfield; Hugh j..
Keenan,, Scranton; John Farm, Lehigh;
William Moses, Scranton; William j.
Neiger Taylor; Charles Oakley, La
Plume; James Surdival, Carbondale;
Cephus Scott, Scranton; +. c. Thomp-
son, Newton; A. Is. Tillinghas, La
Plume; John Waterfield, CarbOndale;
j. II. Wheeler, Jermyn.
ONLY TWO CONSTABLES.
Only two constables reported viola
tions of the liquor law. Seth Smith, of
the First ward of Scranton, returned
Michael Durkn, John =. Neary, Thos.
Hoban and Elizabeth Harrington and
Richard Barron, constable of Dickson
borough, returned Edward ]. Burke.
None of the South Side constables had
anything to report that would require
the consideration of the district at
torney.
Three cases were set down for hear
ing in equity court: G. {. Sapp against
the New York Dental parlors: Eliza
beth Maynard against Catherine Sta
pies, Isaac b. Felts against the Della
ware, Lackawanna and Western rail-
road company. The last named case
ws continued until the next term.
The Sapp case was argued by John
NJ. Harris and John r. Scragg for the
complainant; Charles L. Hawley, for
the defendant. 1t is a suit to deter
mine the right to the Use of the trade
name, "The New York Dental Par
lors."
DIR. c. c. Sapp, the plaintiff, alleges
that he opened an office at 134 Wyom-
ing avenue. March 4, 1897, styling the
place the New York Dental Parlors
Through extensive advertising in the
newspapers and the superior quality of
the work performed there he built UP
an enviable reputation for the New
York Dental Parlors.
HIS NAME WAS TAKEN
Some months later, he alleges, DR.
Samuel T.. Starr and several associates
representing New York firm estab-
lished New York Dental Parlors' al
the corner of Lackawanna and Wyom-
ing avenues. Persons who wanted
work done at the DR.. Sapp institution
found their way to the other place, il
is alleged, and as an inferior quality
| of work, it is alleged, was done at the
DIR. Starr establishment, the plaintiffs
aforesaid enviable reputation was dam
aged to a great extent.
The defense was that DR.. Sapp was
the transgressor. Mr.. Hawley con.
| tended that the New York Dental Par.
lors, represented by DIR. Starr, was ar
| incorporated institution, chartered un-
| der the laws of New York and author.
| lied to do business in the state OF
Pennsylvania. While it was true that
| the company was not chartered unit
| May Is, 1897, it was in existence anG
doing business under the name of the
New York Dental Parlors, as early as
| 1892 in New York state and 1896 II
| Pennsylvania. 1t was alleged that Dr
Sapp knew of this and that when ht
established New York Dental Par
| lors" in this city he was banking OF
| the reputation of the New York con
| cern.
CLAIM MADE BY Mr.. HAWLEY.
| Mr.. Hawley also contended that Dr
Sapp had assigned whatever right h,
might have had in the trade name hN
| loning with DR.. G f.. Hill, DIR. Charles
| Hill, Mrs. Celia Hill and Mrs. Jenni,
Hill. in petitioning the governor for {
| charter for a corporation to be known
as THE New York Dental Parlors,
the application having been made jus
prior TO tha commencement of tn,
present suit. Judge Gunster ruled thii
offer out as being immateral Tn
arguments in the case were concluded
| at o'clock.
This morning the case IF Maynard
| against Staples will be heard. 1t is {
suit for the possession of a piece of lane
in the North End.
| ktnD NUW tInurc