The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1898-05-26
DISTRICT COURT MATTERS
Two New Suits Filed With the
Clerk of the Court.
BILLS l0F AN ARCHITECT
he Seeks to Recover Money Alleged to
Be Due From h Northumberland
Divorce Granted and Other
Business Disposed OF.

The district court was in session yes
terday forenoon, and disposed of a few
minor matters. Two news suits were
filed with the clerk. one of which was
by A. Hensgen VS.. Henry v~ollenweider
and wife. 1t is to recover on balances
due for work performed on two build
ings owned by the Vollenweiders.
The first cause of action against the
defendants alleges that the plaintiff. in
the four months prior to March /, 1895.
in the capacity of an architect. pre-
pared certain plans and specifications
for the ~remodeling Of the front of an old
building belonging to the Vollenweid-
ers, In block . of Anaconda, and that
the value of said work. was $12. IS. the
whole of which is now due and unpaid.
For the second cause of action the
plaintiff alleges hat during the same
period he furnished plans for the re-
modelling of the Denver house, and that
the reasonable value of such specifica-
tions is s33, all of which is unpaid and
due.
For the third cause 1t is alleged that
the plaintiff performed certain work in
repairing the Lyceum hall. to the value
of siS1.60. of which amount $50 was paid
~ th' n a uit
to plaintiff of 81 so. and the fourth
action alleges: ''Tha between the LIST
day of November. 1897, and the LIST day
of March, 1898, the said plaintiff. at the
special Instance and request of the said
defendants, n i'm the capacity of an
architect, prepared for and furnished to
said defendants certain plans and spec
iications for the ~remodeling and recon-
struction of what is known as the Ly-
ceum nal building. and which said
plans and specifications contemplated,
by the direction of said defendants. the
remodeling and reconstruction of the
same as a three-story building. for all of
which the said defendants agreed to
pay to the aid plaintiffs the reasonable
value thereof: that the reasonable
value of said plans prepared and fur
nished by this plaintiff to said defend
ants at their special instance and re-
quest was and is the sum of $3.50. That
no part of this sum has been paid"
Wherefore the plaintiff prays judg-
ment against defendants for the sums
above named.
Rodgers VS.. yelling and Kate Napton,
to foreclose.
Cases in court were disposed of as
follows:
( Cooney Bros. VS.. John Fitzpatrick: CO.
PENDANT allowed 20 days in which 10
amend answer.
Beaudette Bros. VS.. the Standard
Drug The motion heretofore
argued and submitted to compel plaiI-
tiff to elect which cause to proceed up
on overruled. and all proceedings stayed
until costs are paid in former actions
sustained.
Davidson Bros. VS.. NJ. ]. Murphy ct
AL: defendant allowed 20 days in Nrich
to amend answer.
George Austin VS.. Thee. Ehrat It al;
in this cause judgment was ordered en-
tered against the defendant IN the sum
of S44 so. with interest from Sep.smb~r
"a, 1895, and accrued costs. Dcfen!I mt
was given 80 days in which to prepare
a statement on motion for "A new trial.
The case OF the state VS.. Daniel Court
ney was continued for the term.
In the ease of Lulu Mcnamara rs.
James Mcnamara, a default was en-
tered and the court ordered a decree OF
divorce after hearing testimony.
Patrick McDermott was admitted to
citizenship.