The Worcester spy. [volume] (Worcester, Mass.) 1898-1904, 1898-10-04
SuprenneCourt
in Session.
FIFTY-SIX CASES.
Blair-Cristy Trouble Heard
On Opening Day.

The October sitting Of the supreme
judicial court opened in this city yes
terday with Chief Justice Field and
Associate Justices Morton, Knowlton,
Barker and Hammond on the bench
Prayer was offered by Rev. DR.. John
E. Tuttle of Union Church, after which
the docket was read by Clerk T. S.
Johnson. there being Sc cases for the
consideration of the court.
The exceptions in the cases of Oscar
r. Tibbetts ct al. vs.. Henry F. Arms
and George M. Mum VS.. May e. john
son, were waived
The first case heard was that Of
Frank w. Blair VS.. the Telegram News
paper Company and austin p. Cristy.
| This was a bill in equity brought by
Blair to compel Mr. Cristy to pay into
the treasury Of the corporation certain
money taken by him under pretence Of
salary. The defendants fled a demur-
| rer which was heard before Judge Dun
| bar, who oyerruled it. The defendant
appealed to the full bench and the hear
! ing before the court is on the appeal.
Frank P. Goulding appeared for Blair
and Sherman l.. Whipple for the de-
| PENDANT.
The next case was that Of Emma J.
Newton VS.. the city Of Worcester. This
was an action of tort to recover for
personal injuries sustained by reason
of defect in the sidewalk on Chandler
street. The case was tried before
Judge Gaslill and the defendant asked
| the court to rule on three questions
the last two Of which We're as follows:
Second, that there is no evidence that
apart from the snow or ice, there was
a condition amounting to a defect in
said way; third. IL the plaintiffs in
| juries were occasioned wholly by rea-
son of the accumulation of ice and
snow, and would not have occurred II
there had been no ice nor snow on the
sidewalk, then the plaintiff cannot re-
| cover" The court refused these ques-
tons and the defendant excepted, the
present hearing being on the excep-
tons. Charles C. Milton appeared for
the plaintiff and Arthur P. Rugg for
the city.
The case of Edward E. AIdrich VS.
Charles F. Aldrich, exor. ct ais, was
brought for the court to interpret &
clause in the will of the late Judge P
Emory Aldrich. George S. Taft ap
peared for the plaintiff and William 3
Durant and Charles Aldrieh for the de.
PENDANTS.
The case of William f. Duggan VS.
the New England Railroad company
was an action of tort to recover fol
personal injuries, sustained at a cross
ing in Franklin. The case was tried a
the March term of the superior cour
before Judge Gaskill and the question
before the present court comes on tn
defendants exceptions to certain in
structions given by the judge in hi
charge to the jury, which returned
verdict for the plaintiff Herbert Par
ker appeared for Duggan and Frank P
Goulding argued the case for the de
PENDANT
The case of Frank D. Gleason VS.
Freedom G. Smith was an action G.
tort to recover for personal injuries
sustained by reason of an alleged de
feet in the machine on which the plain
| tiff was working. The case was trieC
before Judge Bond, who took it from
the jury The plaintiff excepted, anC
the present hearing is on the excep.
tons. Arthur P. Rugg appeared fol-
| Gleason and James A. Stiles for tht
defendant.
The case of Albert w. Weeks VS.. Is.
rael L. Currier ct al. was a bill il
equity to recover on a real estate
transaction, in which the plaintiff al.
| leges false representations The case
was reserved on facts by Judge Dewey
and it was left with the supreme court
to decide what was just. Arthur P
Rugg appeared for Weeks and Herbert
Parker for the defendants
The case of John C. Avery VS.. George
A. Craig ct al. was a bill in equity
brought to secure the dissolution of q
partnership. All the papers in the case
had not been printed by the plaintiff
and the court adjourned the case fol-
three weeks, when it will be heard in
Boston. Burton W. Potter appeared
for the plaintiff and Ernest H. Vaughan
for the defendant