The Wichita daily eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1890-1906, 1898-02-15
APPELLATE COURT DECISIONS
Damages Awarded Against the Ar
kansas City Bank.

The following decisions were handed
down by the APPELLATE court at Garden City
and arrived here yesterday morning:
c. NJ Condor VS.. Lon Wood, administra-
tor estate William H. WooT, error from
Kingman county; reversed.
C. E. Wiscand vs. W. c. Parker, error
from Mcpherson county; affirmed.
NJ. c. Hale VS.. the board of county COM
missioners of Greenwood county, Kansas,
error from Greenwood county; affirmed.
The Arkansas City Bank VS.. Dewitt
Mcdowell, error from Cowley county; af-
firmed.
SYLLABUS.
An allegation of the extension Of author
ity shall be taken as true unless the de-
NAL thereof be verified by the affidavit Of
the party, his agent or attorney.
An attorney may testify that certain
person is his client. This is not priv
lege communication.
In October, 1889. Warren and Kirby were
the owners of 1925 head of cattle on Beach
and Fagin's ranch in the Kaw reserva-
ton in the Indian territory, and were Of
fering them for sale. Beach and Fagin
wanted TO buy them, but did not have
the money. The Arkansas City bank
furnished the money and took from War
rem and Kirby an assignment of five prom
issory notes signed by Beach and FaGins
aggregatinug the sum of S26.040 and a
chattel mortgage upon the 1,225 cattle and
certain other cattle belonging to Beach
and Fagins. The bank took also from
Warren and King a bill of sale, the con-
sideration of which was so. $50. and from
Beach and Fagins a bill of sale for the
lbs cattle and certain other cattle, the
consideration of which was S26.040. In
December of 1890, ]. L. Britton, the pres
ident of the bank, brought criminal action
against Dewitt Mcdowell and his brother
in a justice court, charging them with the
larceny of $50 head Of cattle. the property
of the bank, and valued at $50 each, total
of $1,000. The McDowells were arrested
on the Sth day of December and the case
being continued to the 18th day of De-
cember, the McDowells entered into re-
cognizance in the sum of $4,000 each for
their appearance.
On the 18th the bank attempted to dis
miss the case so that the McDowells could
be taken into custody by United States
deputy marshal upon Il warrant issued
by a United States commissioner of Ok
lahoma territory The case was con-
tinued to the next day, when the Nc
Dowells waived examination of the
charges, and failing to give bond, were
taken to Jail at Winfield
When the transcript arrived at the
district clerks office the county attorney
had the case dismissed and the prisoners
were held under warrant upon complaint
made by James L. Britton, by w. p.
Meadows, United States commissioner.
Marshal Payne took the McDowells TO
Guthrie, the case was continued to Deem
Der % and then dismissed.
In August Dewitt Mcdowell commenced
action against the bank for damages for
false Imprisonment. The bank answered
that Britton did not act as representing
the bank. The case was tried before a
Jury which gave Mcdowell $500. The
! decision was affirmed by Denison, all the
Judges concurring, in substance stating
that Mcdowell alleged in his petition the
authority of Britton which was not denied
by the bank officers under oath. The pro-
| ceedngs held in Cowley county. Kansas.
constituted malicious prosecution, provid-
ed Britton had no probable cause for be
lieving Mcdowell guilty Of the larceny
charged, but the proceedings were regu-
lar and there was no false imprisonment
under the warrant issued by y. Baxter.
the Arkansas City justice. The proceed
ings had in Oklahoma were void, for the
reason that the commissioner who issued
The warrant WI, a commissioner for Ok
lahoma and not for Kansas, and consu-
tutes false imprisonment.
Mr.. r c. McMuIlen Of Great Bend. is
in the city attending the Masonic meet
ing which is being held in the AudIto-
rum.