The Wichita daily eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1890-1906, 1899-12-08
MAKES LAWYERS HEADS ACHE
Worst Tangled Case in Creation Is in
Court Again.

w. f. Denny, by his attorney, Irwin
Stratton, yesterday took another step in
the Jarndyce VS.. Jarndyce case Of Sedg-
wick county. Denny files suit in the dis
trict court against George Ross of this
city to get judgment for debt of 1854,
which, with interest and costs of former
suits in the same cause since 1879,
amounts to S293S.4O.
The petition goes into recital of all
the stages of the case, narrating the old
allegation, settled long ago, that w. W.
Guthrie, Charles Hatten, w. E. Stanley
and H G.. Ruggles were parties to con-
spiracy with Ross, whereby the attempt
was made, it was claimed to get control
of the judgment that had been rendered
in order to prevent and hinder the plain
tiff, Denny. from collecting the Judgment
or any portion Of it.
This seems to be a very badly mixed
case. and Is seemingly a prolonged effort
by Mr.. Denny to keep alive an old judg
ment against Ross. The Judgment was
first secured and executed in 1879, but the
petition claims that there has never been
found any property on which TO levy and
time and again the execution has been
returned unsatisfed. In March, 1891. pro-
ceedfngs in and Of execution were begun
in the probate court. Mr.. Ross duly ap
peared in the suit, but the case was con-
tinued and remained pending from time
to time on the application Of the defend
ant, until July Of that year, when the
same terminated without any money,
property or effects having been found on
which TO apply the judgment 1t was at
this time according to the long nara
ton, that the conspiracy to get charge
of Denny's judgment was enacted. The
petition alleges that in pursuance of an
agreement. W. W. Guthrie, by his attor-
neys, Hatton & Ruggles. commenced a
suit by proceedings in attachment in the
court OF common pleas. July .. against
one W. A Denny, or a pretended claim
against him in favor of Guthrie. They
alleged in the pleadings that Daniel r.
Tenney, from whom this plaintiff, w F
Denny, had purchased this Judgment
against Ross. had also sold to W. A
Denny this same Judgment. and attempt
ed TO levy said writ Of attachment on
same. The petition alleges that Guthrie
attempted 10 levy the writ Of attachment
on the Judgment and seize and sell the
same as the property Of W. A Denny. \
new judgment and order Of sale in this
attachment was made on September 80 OF
that year and ". E. Stanley and George
Ross, the petition alleges. in pursuance
Of the agreement aforementioned at
tempted and pretended TO bid of and buy
the said Judgment at this sale. in the
name Of ". Z. Stanley.
W r Denny claims II his petition FLED
yesterday that w A Denny had TO in
terest in the judgment al any time. and
neither had Il ever been assigned or
transferred 70 him. II April. 1Sss. J. =.
Houston ana W. H Boone commenced
suit IN the district court against Daniel
K. Tenny. ". A Denny, W. r Denny.
W. Z. Stanley and ". z Guthrie. where
IN they claimed a Hen for attorney fees
in the sum 81 $500 Afterwards Attorney
Hatt7n was made 4 party 20 the SUIT and
fled his craSs- PERI .icns wherein he claim
81 a lien for larger amounts as attorney
fees Then Mr.. Stanley. a. defendant in