The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1899-03-14

The Supreme court at Philadelphia
yesterday handed down opinions in six
LaCkawanna cases. In each instance
the judgment of the court of this coun-
ty was sustained.
One of the most important, or at
least the most interesting of the SIN
disposed Of, is the celebrated Nichols
appeal. 1t is hoped that this finally
disposes of litigation that has been
before the court for years. The appeal
was taken to the Supreme court by
James Nichols, son Of the late DR..
Hiram Nichols, of Clark's Green.
When Dr. Nichols died he made no
provision in his will for his son, James,
and the latter has since been fighting
the heirs. Countless suits of all kinds
have been the result DR.. Nichols. in
his will left his property to his daugh-
ters, Mrs. N. S. Davis and Mrs. Mary
zimmerman, and his daughter-in-law,
Mrs. Asa Nichols.
James brought proceedings to have
the will set aside and to secure the
production of another will which he
said favored him, but in both instances
he was defeated.
WANTED A DEED.
Then he asked the court to secure
for him the deed of a piece of land at
Clark's Green known as the Rose farm,
which consists of forty acres. He al
legged that his father made deed of
this land and gave it to him, but he
afterwards gave it back to his father
for safe keeping. After the latters
death the document could not be found
and Nichols asked the court to order
another deed made for him.
Judge Archibald decided that the tes-
timony did not warrant such action
upon his part and refused to do so.
Thereupon James Nichols took an ap-
peal to the Supreme court During
the recent Lackawanna week at the
Supreme court the case was argued by
Attorneys Vosburg and Dawson for
Nichols and Attorney John f. Scragg
for the estate.
In the equity proceedings of Johanna
Ferdinando against the city of Scran-
ton the decision of Judge Gunster was
upheld by the Supreme court. Mrs.
Ferdinando purchased a property on
Ninth street, alongside Of which was
narrow passageway that had for
years been used as an alley. This she
closed up. The city threatened to tear
down her buildings and the court was
asked TO restrain the city from such
action. Judge Gunster made the in
junction permanent and the city took
an appeal to the Supreme court and
! lost. The passageway will now remain
closed
THE JURISCH CASE.
In the suit of Jurisch and others
against the Sterling Cycle company the
decision of Judge Archibald was upheld.
A. w. Jurisch conducted a sporting
goods store on Spruce street and his
stock was disposed of at a constable S
sale his sisters, Mrs. Cokley and Miss
Jurisch, becoming the owners through
This sale. The business was continued
under the name of JuriSCh and some
tllne later the Cycle company levied on
the goods to satisfy a claim of 81 2OO
against \. w. Jurisch. Mrs. Cokley
/ ana Miss JurisCh took steps to prevent
TINS seizure of their goods, and when
the case was first tried the jury dis
agreed. ON the second trial the Ver-
diet was in favor of the women, and
Judge Archibald refused "A new trial. An
/ appeal was taken from this decision
ana the supreme court now sustains it,
When the case was argued at Phila-
deIphia Attorneys John +. Scragg and
X. y. Zimmerman appeared for Mrs
COklcy and Miss Jurisch and ATTORNEYS
watson, Dtehl and Kemmercr for the
cycle company.
Other cases decided yesterday We're:
Fellows ". Cornelius Smith ct al. G.
+. Lackawanna, decree affirmed: Miller
vs.. Cramer, ct al, {. p, Lackawanna
. county, Judgment affirmed; John
Church Organ company VS.. Guernsey
G. p, L.ackawanna, decree affirmed