The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1902-11-27

The list for this week was disposed of
in common pleas court yesterday, and
jurors not doing duty in cases on trial
were discharged from further attend
ance for the week.
Just before noon yesterday the jury
in the case of Mrs. Ida Campbell
against l.. A. Lange and others. which
had been out since the day before, re-
ported that an agreement between the
members of the jury was impossible.
Judge Newcomb discharged them from
further consideration of the case.
The appeal of Nolan Bros. against II.
S. Peek, executor, and others was re-
ported settled and off the list. The
wage case of Elizabeth Lee against
George Pruner was also reported settled,
and the action in assumpsit of ii. A.
Depuy against Jennie Brink was con-
tinued.
Yesterday morning the case of Will
lam Zuecrae against the Scranton Rail-
way company was given to the jury,
but an agreement had not been reached
up to adiourning hour. When the case
OF James Campbell against the Scran-
ton Railway company was called for
trial there was no appearance on the
part of the defendant, and a non-sult
was granted.
Cohen Did Not Appear.
The case of William Mosevitch against
Louis Cohen was called before Judge
Kelly. The plaintiff said he was en-
ployed by Cohen as clothing sales
man, at salary of $40 per week. After
the first week Cohen dismissed him and
fp 1,n
was no appearance on the part of
Cohen and a verdict for $10.S5 was re-
turned in favor of MOsevitch.
BY agreement verdict Of $190 was
taken in favor of the plaintiff in the
action brought by the Porter Milling
company against Goodman & Weiss.
The suit OF 0. A. Spencer against Kate
McDermOtt, an appeal was reported
settled, and the action in assumpsit of
George w. Jenkins against the city of
Scranton, to recover salary due him as
tax collector for the city, was referred
to Attorney NJ. w. Lowry.
In the suit of Hicks e. Johnson
against Henry Shaffer. a verdict for
SS9.S7. the full amount of the claim, was
returned. There was no appearance for
the defendant.
Hinerfeld Case.
Before Judge Kelly, the suit of the
Atlantic Refining company against r..
F. TrCaGer was given to the jury just
before adjournment. Treager purchased
two gasoline tanks from the plaintiff
and refuses to pay for them, on the
ground that they were not what the
company represented them to be. The
company sues to collect S51, alleging
that Treager understood perfectly what
kind of a tank he was buying.
Before Judge Newcomb, the trespass
suit of Simon Hinerfeld against Ser
geant of Police C. w. Ridgway was put
on trial yesterday morning and was
given to the jury late in the afternoon.
Hinerfeld is merchant doing business
on Penn avenue, and on October II, 1901,
his driver was arrested for obStructing
q street car on Penn avenue and taken
to the central police station, where Ser
geant RidgWay was on duty.
Hinerfeld went to the police station
with his employe to try and secure his
release. Quite II crowd had gathered in
the corridor, and Hinerfeld says that
while he was trying to get the atten-
ton of Ridgway and offer himself as
surety, Ridgway grabbed him, pulled
him into his office and then took him
back to the cells and locked him up.
For this he wants damages in the sum
of $1,000.
The defense is that Hinerfed was
making Il great row in the corridor and
continued to hammer at the door of
the desk sergeant's Office after two off,
N
and keep quiet. He was arrested for
disorderly conduct. City Solicitor Wat
son represented the defendant, and At