The Butte inter mountain. [volume] (Butte, Mont.) 1901-1912, 1901-10-31
LADY'S OTTER COAT
MRS. DELLA BARBEAU'S SUIT
AGAINST HER FURRIER.
TRIAL IN DISTRICT COURT
Coat Valued at $500 by the Lady
Defendant, ]. NJ. Froelich, Said It
Was a Poor Coat-Burglars
Got It.

An interesting trial by jury of an ac-
ton in which ladys otter coat was the
bone, or rather the skin, OF contention.
was begun in Judge McClernan's de-
partment Of the district court this morn
ing.
The parties interested are Mrs. Della
Barbeau and ]. NJ. Froelich
Mrs. Barbeau is comely young
woman, and Mr.. Froelich is a middle
aged furrier of German extraction. The
former was represented by Attorney
Miles Cavanaugh, and the interests of
the furrier reposed in the hands of At
torney ]. F. Diercks. The case was one
appealed from the justice court.
Mrs. Barbeau once owned an otter
coat. according to her complaint, and 1t
must have been a fine one, for she value
it at $500.
In August, 1900, her complaint says,
she entrusted the garment to the de-
PENDANT for the purpose of having him
repair it, and on October II, 1900, she
demanded it's return and offered to pay
all charges Mr.. Froelich should make
for his labor.
Refused to Return Coat.
The complaint then alleges that the
furrier refused to return the coat, and
he ever afterwards SO refused. After
tuIs, MIS-. bdIU Sucu IlCMCu lOI TIC
value of the coat, which she set at $500
The suit was brought in Justice Nichols
court and was tried by a jury there.
Mrs. Barbeau won the suit in that
court. recovering judgment for $2l0
against Froelich last January. Froelicil
then appealed to the district court, and
the present trial followed.
The reason Froelich did not return
| the coat was because it was stolen from
his shop in burglary on the night OF
| October s, his answer to the complaint
| says. In his answer he admits every
thing alleged in the complaint except the
| value Of the coat, which he sets at 500
In the answer he also says that the
| plaintiff was notified to come and gel
her coat before 1t was stolen, but tha
| she did not do so.
Froelich made a coupter-claim for $50
which he said was the price agreed upor
| for the repair work.
Fair Plaintiff Testifes,
On the stand this morning Mrs. Bar
| beau testified that she took the Othel
garment to the furrier to have it re-
| modelled.
WAS it in good condition." she wa.
asked.
1T was. 1t had large sleeves, and
|
| replied.
On cross-examination she admitted
| that the jacket was little worn undo
the left arm. She said, on direct exam
| ination, that the coat was worth 5000.
will you swear that YOU paid $50
for the coat. Mrs. Barbeau?" the OppOs
! ing lawyer asked.
NO" the lady replied.
She then said that the price that sh
| agreed to pay for the coat was $3.50 o
$500. She did not remember what sh
paid for it.
She denied that she was notified t
take the coat out of the store before tn
burglary.
Froelich contradcted this statemen
on the stand. He also said that tn
coat was a very poor coat.
Mr.. Froelich told about the burglar
OF his store, and said that he knew moth
ing at all about the proceedings OF tn
burglars who stole the lady's coat til
the next day. and that he locked hi
doors at night. He said he lost 5000
worth of goods in the burglary.