The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1900-01-11
AN ALLEGED EVICTION.

UuSl1cSS.
AN ALLEGED EVICTION.
Mrs. Burke had the license renewed
in her own name and attempted to pu:
| in another tenant. hut when she went
on the premises to have the Gallagh-
ers remove their stock from the closed
storeroom. they set up IN alleged oral
agreement that they were TO continue
to occupy both stores as a grocery
Mrs. Burke thereupon went in and
| removed quantity Of the liquor which
| was stored there. piling it on the side
walk. The appeal in the case is bascd
| on the claim that there was no evic-
| ton under the definition Of the law.
4. r. Martin for the appellee, and
| f. F. McGovern fer the appellant, ar
| gued the case Of Bridget Reilly against
the Prudential Insurance company.
appellant. The defendant company
| seeks to reverse the finding Of the
| lower court on the ground that a fatal
| error was committed in allowing the
title of the case to be changed from
bridget Reilly" to Bridget Reilly.
ADMINISTRATIVE" The company claims
that this change means the substitu-
tion of an entirely new person. The
appellee claims It was simply the cor
| rection of clerical error.
The case Of the commonwealth, ap-
pellant, against Plymouth township,
| was argued by Assistant District At
| torney Rush Trescott and u. l.. Grew
cling for the commonwealth, and w.
S. Mclean for the township. A quar-
| rel between neighbors about Goa,
shed resulted in the constable being
directed to return the supervisors for
not removing some houses and a
fence which three parties, among them
| one of the disputing reighbors, had
built partly on the line of an old road,
narrowing it by these distractions
from fifty to twenty-seven feet.
At the trial in the court below, the
judge directed verdict for the de-
fense on the. ground that the width Of
the road had not been regularly fixed
when the road was laid out in 1920,
ana consequently the commonwealth
was only entitled to regard as the
road so much Of 1t as had been in ac-
| tual use as road.
SUIT FOR AN "AD" BILL.
An interesting question is involved in
the case Of f. Freas Bogert against II, =,
County of Luzerne, appellant. which
was argued by John T. Lenahan for the
appellee and George S. Ferris. for the
county.
In 1894 the law governing the pro-
claiming Of an election stipulated that
the sheriff was to publish the procla-
nation in two newspapers, or by hand
bills. The proclamation Of the fall elec-
tion in that year was published in Mr..
Bogert's Wilkes Barre Leader and also
proclaimed by posters. The County
| commissioners refused to pay the 1850
bill submitted by Mr.. Bogert. on the
ground that the contract which the
sheriff made was illegal. The appel
lees contention is that he did not have
to inquire whether or not a contract
had been made with some second news
paper. He fulfilled his duties. he
claims, when he satisfied himself that
an appropriation had been made to pay
the bills and that the sheriff was au-
thorized to make the contract.
August Stople's appeal from the re-
port Of the board of viewers which laid
out private road across his farm in
Denison township near White Haven,
was argued by c. T.. Keck and s. ].
Strauss, The complaint to the court Is
that the road extends between his
house and barn, which is very unda-
sirable.
The actual cause Of the dispute is q
long-standing feud between the except
ant and his brother and neighbor,
Julius Storle.
j. II. Van Luven was employed by a
carpenter who contracted to build a
house for Alvin Holmes, of West Pitts
ton. Holmes made an agreement to pay