Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1900-04-13
AWARDS lana $500
Jury In Damage Shit Returns Yer.
dict For That Amount Against
Quarry Company.
Verdict Same as Returned on Former
Hearing LAMA Satisfied
With Amount.
New Trial Will Be Asked by the
Defendant Other Court Mat.
tiers Divorces.

The jury in the LAMA case, in which
the LeGrand Quarry Company was de-
PENDANT in suit for $50, 900 lama ges for
the loss of the plaintiffs eye by
means of the premature explosion of
gunpowder while the plaintiff was in
the employ Of the defendant, returned
a verdict at 8 o'clock this morning,
finding for the plaintiff and assessing
the amount of his recovery at 5000. In.
answer tosa special interrogatory of the
court in regard to whether or not q
settlement had been made by the de-
lifendant company withsthe plaintiff, the
jury answered that in its opinion the
evidence showed that there had been
no sediment made.
| The jury reached its verdict after a
Ideliberation extending from $3.50 O'clock
Thursday afternoon until this morn.
ing. The verdict was a compromise
one, as far as the amount of damages
Sustained, is concerned. On the ques-
ton of whether or not there had been
q settlement, however, the conclusion
was unanimous. the first ballot being
twelve to nothing in the opinion that
no settlement had been made.
On the first ballot regarding the re-
covery of damages the opinions Of the
ljurymen seem to have varied greatly
One voted for $4,000 damages, another
for $4,000, three or four others from
| $4,000 to $4,000, others $4,000, one for.
$4,000 and another $4,000. In succeeding
ballots ten We're willing to allow the
plaintiff $4,000. while the other two
held out for damages under $1,000. An
1 agreement was finally reached, after
balloting I'LL night, and $4,000 was
'agreed upon.
This verdict is the same in amount as
twas rendered at the hearing OF the case
at the November term of court, 1899
4 The verdict is considered somewhat OF
asvictory for the defendant as the gem
1eral opinion seemed to be that in the
isecond case the amount OF damages al
Il lowed would be greater than in the first
case. The plaintiffs attorney, in fact.
lexpected more, but says that his client
is satisfied 1.-the amount. feeling
4 that 1t represents the sentiment of
j twenty four men.
As far as the plaintiff Is concerned,
4 therefore, there will be no attempt
for new trial. The defense, however
Twill, within the three days allowed by
j the court prepare a motion for new
Il trial and IL that is not granted. will UNI
4 doubtedly take an appeal.
OTHER COURT MATTERS.
The case of Boyd VS. Evans. which
4. was called after tho conclusion of thu
}. LAMA case Thursday afternoon, wa.
I Icontinued, on defendants application
J. to the September term. An amend
ment and substituted reply was filed
1 when the case was called and the ques
q tion Of costs in the5continuance is to b.
). gleft open to be determined upon thu
q Anal disposition of the case
The case of Thomas Nichols VS.. Rich
ard N1odlin was called this morning ant
a jury was secured in the persons of j
u w. Pursel, William Ford. w. r. Willim
John Jacobson, James Farney, Charle'
A Walker, Charles Jaroleman, Georg,
s. p. Knisely and L. D. Reed. Thi
case is controversy over the owner
ship Of a quantity of cornstalks.
The case went to the jury this after
moon.
At 2::3o o'clock the work Of cmpan
Ineling a jury in the case OF Ensminge
We. Luth. ct al, was begun.
TWO DIVORCES GRANTED.
In a couple of breathing spells af
[ forded the court Thursday afternoon
/ occasion was taken to grant two di
lvorces. Gottlieb Gilgan was granted
i divorce from his wife, Ruth "A. Gilgan
and Mrs. Amanda Adams was release,
:, from the bonds of matrimony Mrs
Adams husband was "Bill' Adams. q
I.iscomb, who is now serving. a life sen
tence in Fort Madison for the murde
OF his uncle. Charles Russell.