Omaha daily bee., 1903-04-11

William Diedrich lost out on his appeal
from the decision of the district court of
Lincoln county in giving his wife, Laura
Diedrich, divorce on the ground of cruelty.
Orders a New Trial.
The court ordered new trial in the dis
trict court Of Valley county of the damage
suit brought by Anna Hajsek against the
Burlington Railroad company for 1899
damages. Commissioner Ames wrote the
opinion, and it is somewhat distinguished
for its literary character. The district
Judge upon the trial of the case took the
case away from the Jury and instructed for
the railroad company. The supreme court
says he Is wrong.
Mrs. FIajsek and her husband live near
Ord. On the evening OF December 22. 1900
they were driving home after a shopping
expedition in town. and not knowing that
the regular passenger train was overdue
drove upon the track in front of 1t. The
wagon was hurled forty feet and the woman
very badly injured. To keep the case from
going into the federal court suit was
brought for less than 50, 900. The company
maintained that the husband of the plaintiff
was negligent and therefore that under the
law of imputed negligence the negligence OF
each party was imputed to the other. In
this case it was argued that being together
and having spoken of the team as ours"
1t was a joint enterprise that brought the
case within the imputed negligence rule.
The supreme court distinguishes the ap-
plication of this rule. however, and Com
Z issioner Ames makes this observation:
Doubtless the life journey of the parties
may in sense be regarded as a joint en-
terprise, but this fact would not be held
to charge the wife with the consequences
of her husbands negligence in most trans
actions"
Case of Malpractice.
The supreme court reversed and sent
back for trial the case of Hannah Johnson
against DR.. ]. S. Winston, from Fillmore
county Mrs. Johnson had sued the doctor
for malpractice, claiming that as a result
of his negligent and unskilful amputation
OF an index finger and the unnecessary re-
moval of the metacarpal bone she lost the
use OF one hand. The verdict below was
III the doctors favor, but the supreme court
says the trial court erred in ruling out prof
fered evidence relating to the proper surg
! ical course.
other Decisions of Interest.
The case in which Bennett sperry recov-
| cred a verdict against the corporation OF
Falls City was reversed because it was
proven that one of the Jurors had made up
his mind as to the merits OF the contro-
versy from his prior knowledge OF the facts.
! ]. d. Knight of Lincoln finally wins his
case against Amos II. Denham. knights
wife left him a 32O-acre farm in Butler
county, but after her death, when he sought
to exercise the rights of ownership he was
met by the claim on the part of Denham
I that the xua his ha had
occupied 1t for more than ten years with
out anybody else claiming It. All this
time Mrs. Knight had been paying taxes
on the land and the court upholds the
claim OF her heir to ownership.
Reverses Damage Case.
The court reversed the judgment obtained
by John Boesen against the Omaha Street
Railway Company for 81, 126, for injuries re-
ceived while passenger on a car. Boesen
worked in South Omaha and. with many
others, rode down on a car, which con-
nected at Q street with a car for the pack
ing house. Every morning it was a rush to
get on the packing house car. and those
who didn't get a foothold walked the re-
mainder Of the way. The district court is
held to have erred in several particulars,
and the opinion is expressed that Boesen
was hurt while running to catch the other
car rather than by a derailment Of the car
he was riding on, as he claimed. The suit
was for $4,000 damages.
The Omaha Bridge and Terminal company
is the gamer by SS.979 by reason of it's ap.
peal TO the supreme court from a judgment
Of the district court in favor of d. G. Whit
ney and others. The latter owned land,
near the Missouri bottoms which the UnicT
Pacific, years ago, occupied with its tracks
There was litigation with the property
owners and a settlement made by which
, Whitney and others we're admitted to b,
owners Of nearly three acres. The road
kept its tracks thereon and operated carr
over them. but when the bridge compan!
sought to condemn them the property own
ers wanted not only So 300 an acre for theil
land, but claimed the tracks were theirs b!
) reason Of the terms OF settlement. Th'
district court held with the property own