Missouri Valley times. [volume] (Missouri Valley, Iowa) 1874-1931, 1901-06-20
NOVEL CASE BEFORE
SUPREME COURT
The Foxiness of John Fox Gets Him
Into Troublesome Liti-
cation.
NOT SO SHARP AS HE THOUGHT
Deceived Neishbor's Daughter, and
Then Trickcd Her Out of . $1,000
Judgment, But Miss Powers
Knew Thing OF Two.

Lincoln, Neb., June ia peculiar
story turks between the dry records of
the case of John Fox vs.. Josie Powers,
which was submitted in the supreme
court today. Fox is the son of a
wealthy farmer in Butler county. Some
six years ago he became involved with
the daughter of neighboring farmer.
Josie Powers, the result of which was
suit at law. Judgment was rendered
against young Fox for 81, 200, with the
alternative of going to Jail until 1t was
paid. But he did neither.
According to the girls story Fox de-
ceived her a second time. He told he:
that he would have married her but
for his fathers opposition, but that if
she would sign stipulation of dis
missal acknowledging the receipt of
$3.50 in full settlement of her claim
against him the old man would give
him an s0-acre farm. Then they would
get married and go to live on it. He
promised to do this in the next ten
days or two weeks and then had his
attorneys draw up stipulation of dis
missal, which he said he wanted to
show TO his father.
Instead of doing this he took 1t down
to the court house and filed 1t. The
girl did not discover this fact for some
time. being meanwhile put off with
various excuses. Then he went and
married another woman.
Soon after this the girl filed a motion
| IN court to set aside the stipulation
and settlement. claiming that her sig
nature had been secured by represen-
| tations and agreements which Fox had
never performed, that at the time Fox
was fugitive from Justice, never hav-
ing filed supersedeas bond or having
been committed to Jail. that he never
/ did pay her $3.50 or any other sum, and
| that as no consideration was ever Civ
en- for her signature 1t was void. The
court promptly struck the stipulation
from the file and reinstated the old
judgment against him.
From this decree Fox appealed to the
supreme court. Notwithstanding that
he does not deny having tricked tn,
| girl, he insists that the girls applica-
ton for relief cannot be sustained be-
cause the secret agreement she made
with him was against public policy AMI
| therefore void. He points out that she
admits in an affidavit that the written
4 agreement or stipulation was sham
| devised for the express purpose of de
Vie AdNLCf VI JOu1l EOA Out Vi
eighty acres of land IN Butler county
They agreed, so she says that to mar
ry In the regular way and thereby set
tie their difficulties would not do, ss
the old man would never give his son
any land II he knew John Fox was go
Ing to marry her."
Fox's attorneys represent to the su
preme court that under the circum-
stances. the woman being party te
such an agreement. she should be left
as she placed herself. as the contract
was one intended to deceive. and asked
/ that the court not enforce such a con-
tract or aid either party connected with
the transaction. Another point upor
which Fox relied was that the woman
had not used due diligence. That she
knew Fox did not intend to carry on,
his agreement after the ten days o.
two weeks had passed. and that ii
waiting seven months, until after his
marriage, other rights and interests
attached.
| Particular stress was laid by Fox's
attorneys on the fact that the cir
admitted that she was a party to 8
scheme to shake the old man down fol
a farm. and they insisted that even II
the young man instead of making the
use of the contract as had been agreed
upon. put 1t to the unlawful use of de
pending on 1t, 1t did not warrant any
court in granting her the relief sh:
prayed for from the trick he put upor
her.