The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1901-05-28

The Dutlin case will have to be tried
all over again. The jury could not
agree, and were discharged.
The case was on trial for five days,
and the jury was out forty-six hours.
They came in at II o'clock yesterday
morning and announced to Judge Kelly
that 1t was impossible for them to come
to an agreement. He spoke to them
regarding the Importance of the case.
the expense the county had been put TO
in trying it, and the expenditures that
they and everyone else concerned had
made. and advising them to make an
other effort to harniunze, sent them
out again.
At 3 o'clock they sent Tipstaff Roland
down with a note, saying they had not
made any progress and that 1t was as
good as certain they would not be OF
one mind no matter how long they
were kept out
Judge Kelly sent for them and re-
lieved them from further consideration
of the case. after expressing regret
that they had not been able to come
to an agreement He said he did not
want to impose a hardship on them
and did not want to do anything that
would force q verdict. When he dis
missed them with the thanks of the
court, there was a chorus of ''rhanks'
from the jurors.
AMOUNT NOT REACHED.
The jury. it is said. never got beyond
the question of whether or not the city
was liable for the accident. The uueS-
tion of the amount of damages was not
reached at all. Eight. at first, were in
favor of findin" that the city was not
liable for any damages and fourfavored
giving Miss Duftn Il verdict. Sunday.
one of the four went over to the ma
jority and thus the division stood till
the end.
The case is now subject to the order
of the plaintiff as to whether or not it
will go back on the trial list Usually
i'm such cases they are advanced to the
head of the list for the succeeding
term.
Judge Kelly is this week in NO. ,.
and is at present engaged in the trial
of the case Of Fl. Fl. Seidel and others
against :. +. Shelley, Franklin Howell
and Alfred Harvey. The plaintiff is
one Of the attorneys in fact for the
Harper estate. which owns a tract of
land at Lebanon. which is supposed
to contain coal. The defendants en-
gagged into an optional agreement TO
develop the supposed coal tract stipu-
lating that they would bore three
holes and giving a bond in the sum
of $1,000 to insure faithful compliance.
They bored one hole and then with
drew from the land The estate is
now suing on the bond. alleging for
fcilure. The defense is that the agents
OF the estate misrcpresented 1t, and
that the plaintiff had no Logan right to
offer 20 lease it, because they did
control it all
James II. Torrey is attorney for the
plaintiff. Walter Briggs and Willard.
Warren & Knapp represent the de-
fendant.
President Judge Edwards, in the
main court room, is trying the case
of Spruks Bros. against William Kin
back and r. G. Robinson. of Carbon
dale. Spruks Bros. sold S320 worth of
lumber to kinback on credit three
years ago. kinback failed shortly at
terward and Robinson. the execution
creditor, came into possession of the
lumber by means of Il bill of sale
executed by lIinback. SprukS Bros
are now trying to recover the lumber
alltSlnS lhat tnt sale Sllall Dc NOlIeu
because of misrepresentation made
by Kinback regarding his financial
standing at the time he secured credit
George D. Taylor and J. w. Brown
Ing represent the plaintiffs. The de-
PENDANTS attorney is II. ID. Stuart.
NON SUITS GRANTED
Non suits We're granted in the fol-
lowing cases because of the non-ap-
pearance of the plaintiffs: l.. w.
Nichols against j. j. Johnson, Frank
Malloy against the Northwest Coal
company. NJ. Green against the Stow
ers Packing company. l.. e. Baker
against the IgertOn Coal company.
The case of the Singer Manufacture
ing company against John NJ. Nc
Garry, ct al, was reported settled,
The case of G.. Il. Gregory against
Louis Connors was referred fur add
judication To Attorney Ralph l.. Levy
The case of T.. Il. y. Edwards
against $. p. LoDgstreet was directed
to be placed at the head of the trial
list for the September term Of COM
,l..nS