The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1898-05-21
MUSTN'T STOP BUSINESS
Judge Lindsay,s Instructions in
the Ramsey Case.
VERDICT IN HER FAVOR
The Jury Gives Her $500 as Damages
Sustained by Her From the At
tachment Placed on Her Prop
erty by Rodgers.

The damage case Of Cora T.. Ramsey
against p. II. Burns. the justice of the
peace; Alexander Rodgers, a special
constable. and +. j. Brophy. Adolph
Rinckle and Haskell Osgood. their Of
fetal bondsmen. ended yesterday after
noon in Judge Lindsay's court by the
jury returning a verdict for the
plaintiff of $500. She had sued for S.
tual damages. alleged to have been suf-
fered by reason of the attachment of
her business at the Elwood cafe by the
justice of the peace and his constable.
The general damages were claimed by
reason of the alleged fact hat the Of
ficers also closed up her lodging house
business n kept her "A prisoner. Judge
Lindsay laid some interesting law in
his Instructions to the jury relative to
attachments levied. holding hat an Of
ficer must not close up a house and
stop business when he levies on a
stock of goods. 1t mas always been the
rule, and too frequently an act of spite
on the part of a creditor, to bring an
action in court for a small amount and
close up the debtors business. Judge.
Lindsay's Instructions to the jury on
that point said an officer armed with
a writ of ttachmen mas no right or
authority to take and mold possession
of premises or buildings in which the
property seized by him is situated,
but that il is his duty to remove the
same from the premises If he desires
to hold 1t unde attachment. IL he
takes possession of the premises he and
his bondsmen are liable to the person
entitled to the possession thereof for
such damages as they may sustain by
reason of such unauthorized act.
I'm this case said the court, IF
you believe from the evidence that the
defendant, Alexander Rodgers, took
possession of the building or any part
thereof i'm the possession of the plain
tiff at he time he made the attach
ment and held it for the storage of the
personal property therein situated,
which he then had under attachment,
and the plaintiff sustained any dam
age by reason thereof, then o viii
find for the plaintiff in such sum as you
may believe she sustained by reason
of said defendant taking possession of
said building and in estimating the
damages you may take into considera-
ton the time that the building was
held possession Of by the defendant"
on the subject of Imprisonment by
attachment officers, for which Mrs.
Ramsey demanded damages, the court
charged the jury that any restraint
put upon the freedom of another by
show of authority or force is sufficient
to constitute an imprisonment, so that
if a person is restrained from leaving
a room or going out of a house with
-. sh.,
infringement of personal liberty will
constitute an Imprisonment.
so. if you believe said the court,
from the evidence in this case that
the defendant Rodgers and his custod-
ian used toward the plaintiff such
words and such a show of authority
that under the circumstances would
induce a reasonable person to remain
i'm the house where plaintiff claims To
have been imprisoned, rather than in
cur the risk of personal violence and
insult by attempting to go and come at
will. plaintiffs detention by such
means. even though M actual force
were used, would o to imprison-
ment. and there being no contention on
the part of defendants hat they had a
right to imprison or detain plaintif,
would be false imprisonment. and tho
plaintiff would be entitled to recover
Tor SAID falSe Imprisonment NHdleNet
damages she sustained by reason there
of. and in estimating said damages you
may take into consideration plaintiffs
loss of time, interruption of her bust
ness and any suffering, body or men,
tai, which the wrong done her has oc-
casioned and the insult n humili-
ation offered, if any. 1t is mo- neces-
sary that the plaintiff should try tc
go and come at will before she could
maintain an action for the false i'm
risonmen If the conduct of the of.
icers on this condition was such as tC
lead a reasonable person under the cir
cumstances TO believe that force would
be used If she attempted to go and
come at will, such conduct would
amount TO false imprisonment"
The jury was polled on the verdict
and stood 10 to 9 in favor of the plain
tiff.