The Wichita daily eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1890-1906, 1899-05-10
ADDITIONAL CITY NEWS.
LAIRD CASE
DECIDED IN THE sUPREME
COURT
Oscar Felix Denied Damage From the
Frisco Road.

the supreme court Of this state handed
down decisions in two more SedgwieK
county cases, affirming the decision OF
Judge Dale in the district court One OF
these was the old case Of Richard h
Laird VS.. John v. Farwell & Co.. OF Chi
cago, which was q damage suit growing
out of the failure OF W. ]. Wilson & Co..
in this city, just at the close OF the DOOM
eriod, and was a sensational suit several
years ago. AT the time Of the failure
w. ]. Wilson & CO. were largely indebted
to a great many eastern firms, and
among them John V. Farwell & Co., Of
Chicago, and Biumanthal Bros. & Co.,
of New York W. D. Curtis, who repre-
sented John V. FarweI & Co. came on
to Wichita and toop possession of the
stock Of goods of Wilson & Co. under =
chattel mortgage given to Farwen & Co.,
and Richard R. Laird, who represented
Blumanthal Bros. & Co.. swore TO an at
tachment affidavit in the district court.
charging that the chattel mortgage was
fraudulently given, and obtained posses
sion of the goods. Then W. D. Curtis
came back at Laird by fling a COMPLAINT
in the justice court and causing Laird TO
be arrested, charging him with perjury.
Then Laird sued John v. FarweI & CO.
for damages in the sum of $4,000, claim
ing that the prosecution by Curtis as the
agent Of Farwell was malicious and with
out probable cause cause. This case was
tried in the district court while Judge
Reed was on the bench and Judgment
for $500 was found by the jury in favor
nf REair, t. no, Ia F.
the supreme court, and in the course of
time was reversed on account Of errors
of law occurring at the trial. 1t was
then sent back to the district court for
newtrial and came up in January, 1898
to be retired before Judge Da'e The
plaintiff introduced his evidence and then
the defendant. who was represented by
Wall & Brooks. filed a demurrer to the
plaintiffs evidence and Judge Dale sus-
tanned the demurrer on the ground that
Curtis was not sue han agent of Farwell
& Co. as would bind them in such :
case. The case was again appealed to the
supreme court, and that decision has just
been sustained by that court.
The other case which has Just been de-
cided finally by the supreme court is the
SclSO VI OSCdI L elk against IHS 81. LOUIS
and San Francisco Railroad company.
This suit was brought by Oscar Felix. the
father Of Efford Felix, who was run over
by train near the intersection of Ohio
and Blaine avenues on the 18th dav of
December. 1894, and had his foot cut off
by the train. The amount of damages
claimed was 5000. At the trial of the
case Oscar Felix testified that he had
seen the boy playing o nthe tracks short
time before the accident and had called
to him to come in, and had then gone
about his work and paid no more atten-
ton to him. In this case Judge Dale sus-
tanned demurrer to the evidence of the
plaintiff on the ground that Oscar Felix.
by his own negligence, had contributed
TO the accident and was not entitled to
recover any damages for himself for the
loss Of the services of the boy. This
case was appealed to the supreme court
and that court sustained Judge Dale's
decision, which finally ends the case.