The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1898-01-30
IN THE DISTRICT COURT
j. M. Bowes Brings Another Suit
Against e. II. Sherman.
MAKES CLAIMS OF FRAUD
Judge Lindsay Issues Venire for Sew
enty-Five Jurors. Returnable Febru-
airy SEVENTH The Inheritance
Tax Case Goes over

John NJ. Bowes yesterday brought
another suit against his former bust
ness partner and representative. e. II.
Sherman, for an accounting. Sarah
e. Sherman, j. d. Slemmons, w. ".
Lawler are also named as defendants
Bowes says in his complaint that ever
since July %, 1888, Sherman has been
his attorney in fact and agent and as
trustee for him has collected large
sums in rents, exceeding a sum of SlS,-
600. 1t is alleged that he invested $4,000
of ii in the construction of brick
building on lot Is, block 10. of the Butte
TOWNSHIP which now stands in the
name of Sarah E. Sherman. He also
acquired in his own name, it is claimed,
the following real estate: The south
100 feet of lot a. block 4, of the Leggat
& Foster addition lot 3. block 2, and
lot 8, block A, of the Kemper addi-
ton; lot 5. block H. of Noyes & Up
tons addition No. 2: lots 8, 10 and IL,
block 1S. and lot Il. block 4, of the
Leggat & Foster addition; lot 6, block
%, of Clark's addition, and the north
seven feet of lot 4 and the south 10
townste of Butte.
The complaint says that in August,
September and October, 1897, Sherman
transferred all of the above property
except that standing in the name of
Sarah e. Sherman, to w. V. Lawler
and j. D. Slemmons, real estate agents,
with the intention of defrauding the
plaintiff out of it, and that Lawler and
Slemmons, for the same reason, intend
ed to transfer 1t to innocent purchasers
and have already sold several parcels
of it for $1,000. 1t is alleged that Sher-
man has no other property which could
be attached by the plaintiff for his
claim and the court is asked to decree
that Sherman hold the property IN
trust for the plaintiff and that Lawler
and Slemmons be required to account
for the sales they have made and the
money they have received, and that
the transfer to them by Sherman be de-
clared void.
Judge Lindsay held session of court
in Department /. yesterday and issued
a venire for rs jurors from which to Sc
lect trial jury, made returnable on
the 7th Of February. The inheritance
tax case had been set for hearing yes
terday morning, but owing to the fact
that the county attorney, who repre-
sented the state, was engaged in the
Franey trial. the matter was continued
for two weeks. Judge Lindsay called
his calendar and set the following JUS
tice court appeals for trial.
Feb. s. F. Fl. Talbot VS.. Mrs. j. j..
York; Jennie Pierson VS.. George Peo-
pies; George Stull VS.. Jonas Johnson;
Overman Wheel company, VS.. Louis
kaufman.
Feb 10, Seattle Grocery company VS..
vs.. L. Rey ct al: j. w. Shackleton VS..
Mrs. Eliza Noble; John Callen VS.. Fred
Anderson; Peter Codozze VS.. T. j. Hen
messy.
Feb. TO- Mary Hurley VS.. Peter Me
Donald. J.sP. Lesher VS.. Andrew Ro-
doni ct al: Anna j. Meyers vs.. Josie
Friend; Frank Boucher VS.. Joseph Bar
SALON ct al: James Glass vs.. II. c.
Worthington.
Feb II, e. Beer VS.. John Zundle ct
al; J. +. Alix vs.. Ed NARROW; S. IL.
Rogers VS.. r. w. Wynne; Carney &,
Wright VS.. j. II. Steele: S. r. Me
Nichols VS.. Thomas Trezovich.
The case of Emil Pohlenzscher VS..
Henry Muntzer was dismissed