The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1902-01-17

Condemnation Proceedings.
Eight Lackawanna cases were argued
before the Superior court yesterday,
leaving eleven yet to be heard.
The cases argued yesterday were
George Cooper against the City of
Scranton, appellant; Mark *. Edgar
against C. N. Calendar, appellant; G.
r. Reynolds against G. NJ Calender,
appellant; ID. +. Replogle against Jane
j.. Singer, appellant; G.. l.. Peck. trus-
tee ct al, appellants, against William
Connell: in re Condemnation of the
Factoryvlle and Abingdon Turnpike.
II. w. Northup, appellant; George w.
Potter ct al, appellants, against the
Scranton Railway Company; Charles
Levin against Martha y. PAUL., admin
istratrix, appellant.
The case of Cooper against the city
was argued by eN-Judge T.. n. Willard
for the appellee, and City Solicitor
George Nj. Watson for the appellant. 1t
is a suit growing out of the alleged
faulty construction of the Fourteenth
ward sewer. The plaintiff recovered for
damages done his property on Eighth
street by water overtowing from n
sewer which was of insufficient capac-
ity.
Under the general rule in this state,
n municipality is not liable for dam
ages resulting from an error of judg-
nlent on the part of any of her officials
If siXteen-inch sewer was, in the
Judgment of the city authorities suf-
ficient to care for the water, and six
teen-inch sewer was built the city
could not be held liable for damages
that might result from the sewer being
too small.
CAUSE OF DAMAGES.
In some states it is the law that the
city can be made liable if notice of the
>ault is given and proof of the faulti-
,css furnished. In this case, Cooper
suffered damage from the incapacity of
the sewer and brought notice thereof
home to the city authorities. No action
was taken to remedy the fault, and
some time later his property was again
damaged by an overflow.
At the trial of the case. the lower
court adopted the rule obtaining in
other states, by which the city is made
ablc after notice of its deficiency is
Drought to it, and directed that the
Jury could find for Cooper, which it did.
The Superior court is therefore now
called upon to confirm the precedent
thus established.
The cases of Edgar against Calender
and Reynolds against Calender We're
argued together, being similar in every
detail, Clarence Balentnc represented
the appellant, and w. s. Diehl, the ap-
pellees.
The plaintiffs. on January Q, 1900,
each bought of the defendant one hun
dred shares of the capital stock of the
Arizona Eastern and Montana Smelt-
ing, Ore-Producing and Development
company, at S. a share, with the UNDER
standing that the defendant would buy
it back at the end of six months for Sc
a share, at the option of the purchasers,
or fifteen days written notice. When
the six months were up they elected to
resell, but he would not buy, and suit
was brought to recover. The plaintiffs
secured Judgment for the full amount
with interest
WAS ACTING AS AGENT.
The defense is that Calender was
acting only as agent for the company
and further, that the terms of the
agreement, prepared by the plaintiffs
attorney We're subscribed to by him
without his understanding them, it
being his understanding that the agree
ment was nothing more or less than a
guarantee that the stock would be as
good in six months as it was at the
time of the sale.
The case of Replogle against Singer
Involved the question as to whether or
not landlord can collect on a lease
for an uneXpired term, when the ten
ant moves out because of the failure
of the landlord to supply water Tor
domestic purposes, in conformity with
an oral agreement made as one of the
conditions of the signing of the lease.
The court below decided that The
proof as to what occurred at or prior
70 the signing of the lease. upon which
ihe Judgment was entered, was not of
character to warrant the opening OF
The Judgment. The appellant alleges
lhe court erred in so finding.
D. B. Replogle. the plaintiff, argued
for himself, and C. II. Soper for the
appellant.
In the case of Peck and others
against Connell. arguments We're made
for the appellants by S. b. Price and
for the appellee by Ezra II. Connel.
1t is suit to set aside Judgment Sc
cured by the defendant against II. Ii.
Beidleman, on the ground that the de-
fendant was irregularly preferred The
lower court decided against the plain.
tihs.
!. IL. Burns appeared for the plain |
tiff appellants and eX-Judge L. n. VIII
lard for the defendant in the case of
Potter and others against the Scran-
ton Railway company,
WAS STRUCK BY CAR.
The plaintiffs sued for damages done
n team and wagon by being struck by
a trolley car. The lower court held
that the driver, the son of the owner, |
was guilty of contributory negligence |
and could not recover.
The arguments in the matter of the !
condemnation of the Factoryyille and |
Abingdon turnpike We're made by S. Il. |
Price for the appellant, and II. II. Hol- |
rate for the appellee.
The case of Levin against the PAUL. |
estate was on at adjourning time and
Will be concluded this morning. Major |
Everett Warren and 1. II. Burns APP
pear for the appellant, and Ralph IL.
Levy for the appellee.
levin was a tenant of the PAUL.
building, on Lackawanna avenue. In
goins to his office at night he was in
cured, he alleges, by tripping on a
broken stair and falling to the bottom
of the flight. The evidence 'of how he
was injured was all, necessarily cir
cumstantial, as the original defendant
died before the trial came off and the
Plaintiff, in consequence, could not be
permitted to testify. Levin was given