The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1901-05-22

Permanently Injured by Falling
Over an Obstruction on the Side
walk on Adams Avenue-The De-
fense Says She Is Attempting to
Blame Old Ailments on the City.
'rhc suit of Mary Dunin against the
| city of Scranton was called for re-
trial yesterday before Judge Kelly In
| the main court room.
She sues for $50, 900 damages for
personal injuries alleged to have been
sustained by falling over large NY
wheel which was lying on the sidewalk
| on Adams avenue, in front of the sew
cntecnth ward voting booth. Nov. =,
| 1888. At the first trial of the case last
! January the plaintiff secured rer-
uIct of $1,000. Judge Archibald grant
ed a new trial in march on the strength
of a plea of City Solicitor NosbirS
| that new evidence had been disrov-
| cred that would tend To put an entirely
different phase to the case.
This newly discovered evidence has
not yet beer disclosed in detail. but
it,, general effect is that the plaintiff
was being treated for the invalidities
she alleges resulted from the fall. long
before the accident occurred
The suit rests largely on the testi-
mony Of medical experts. The plain
tiff puts physicians on the stand to
show that she was physically sound
before the accident. and that since the
acti0ent. and as a result thereof. she
il almost Il wreck. Tho most serious
ai!me mt complained of is an injury to
the eye. In falling, her face struck
the edge of the fly wheel, and as
| result of the cuts and bruises near
one of the eyes she is almost blind.
1t is also claimed her nervous system
is seriously dcrangcd and that her in
tcrnal organs are permanently affect
ed.
The defense contends that Miss Duff
fins nervous and Internal ailments
and trouble with her eyes extend be-
yond the time of the accident. and
that she was treated by various ply
clans long before 1893 for these very
ailments she now alleges are the re-
suit of a negligent act on the part of
the city.
AS to the negligence, the defendant
will strenuously deny liability. The
WY VIII AUNT liItl MISS i'ulllIl ltii
over fly wheel on Adams avenue on
the night in question, but will hold
that Miss Duflin, having defective
eycsight. wandered off the sidewalk
and on to the space between the flag
stones and the fence line, where the
fly wheel was lying. She received a
slight cash over the eye it will be
admitted, but the physician who
dressed the wound will testify that
it was superficial. could not possibly
have affected the cyeSight and was
entirely healed in five days.
The plaintiff admits that the fly
wheel was not on the flag stones, but
contends that a part of its rim was
resting within a few inches of the
flags, and on the space allotted for
he sidewalk.
Ex-District Attorney Martin. of Lu-
zernc county, and Il. G. Ncwcomb
represent the plaintiff. City Solicitor
George Nj. Watson and Assistant City
Solicitor d. j. Davis are caring for the
defense.
a verdict for the defendant was re-
turned in the wage case of Mary j.
Cooper against William Petherick
When ii was previously tried the
plaintiff secured Judgment for S2l9.
She sued for services performed in
caring for her sister, the wife of the
defendant, during her last illness. The
defendant denied that she did more
than occasionally visit her sick sister
and that whatever services she per-
formed were prompted by siStcrly de-
votion and not by any agreement on
his part to recompcnse her John X.
Edwards ana Joseph O'Bricn appeared
for the defendant.
The Scranton Electrical works, rep
resented by Attorney Thomas Hand
Icy, secured a verdict of $a9.O2 against
T.. 7. Craven Tho company did work
for the defendant and he owed bal
ancc of the above amount. There was
no appearance for the defendant.
y jury was out at adjournment in
the case of Spruks brothers against
Patrick Lally, which was on trial Mon
day afternoon and yesterday morning
before Judge Carpenter.
The plaintiff failing to appear, a
non-suit was granted in the case of r.
j. kunZ against the New York Dental
company. Attorney Charles l.. Haw-
ley represented the defendant
Judge Carpenter is trying the case
of William Bright against Frank Web.
ster, in which a claim of S47 for the
rent OF a house in North Scranton is
in dispute. The defendant rented the
house from 1884 TO 1858 and upon quit
ting the promises was still owing a
goodly amount of rent He kept pay
ing ON 1t until 1895, when he ceased and
made claim that the balance was
wiped out The plaintiff held that
there was Si7 still owing, and when
the defendant still refuS,d T., no,, 4,