Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1904-04-29
CIRCUIT COURT.

The work Of the circuit court has
smoothly during the week
and there seems to be plenty Of busi-
ness to engage it during next week.
From the present outlook there will
still be many cases on the calendar un-
touched when the sine die adjournment
becomes necessary.
When THE ENQUIRER went to press
last Tuesday afternoon the court was
engaged on the case Of o. P. Heath,
successor Of the Elliott Mule
Co., suing for damages on account
of a horse that was injured by reason
of a defect in the road a short dis
tance east Of the Catawba River bridge.
The testimony was that party Of
witnesses hired a team from the
plaintiff last fall to go home after
getting through with their business.
It was after night when they crossed
the river, and about one mile the 9TH
er side the team ran into a gully at
point where the road was only elev-
en- feet wide. One horse was so badly
injured that 1t was afterward sold on
the streets Of Yorkville for less than
81. The jury found for the plaintiff
in the sum Of s135.21. McDow & Lew
Is for plaintiff; J. 8. Brice, Esq, for
defendant.
The next case taken up was that Of
J. Edgar Poag VS.. the Charlotte OIL
company. This was suit for the
price Of car load of cotton seed hulls,
alleged to have been spoiled, and dam
ages on account Of cattle alleged to
have been killed by eating the hulls.
The case was originally commenced
about two years ago. The plaintiff got
a verdict for practically the full
amount sued for; but the defendant
appealed on an error made by the
Judge in his charge to the effect that
since a sound price calls for sound
article the defendant was liable for
damages whether he knew the goods
TO be unsound or not. After the tes-
timony Of the plaintiff was in at the
present trial the defendant demurred
against the second cause Of action
claiming damages, and as there had
been no evidence to show that the de-
fendant was aware Of there being any
thing wrong with the bulls at the time
Of their shipment, the court granted
motion to strike the second cause Of
action out of the complaint. The de-
fendant thereupon admitted the plaint-
iffs contention that the hulls were
defective and consented to the entry
Of Judgment for s34. Wilson & Will
son and Finley & Brice for plaintiff,
Thos. F. McDow and Witherspoon &
Spencers for defendant.
The next case was that Of John B.
Moore Sr.. VS.. the Catawba Power
company, a suit for $4,000 damages
on account Of injuries sustained as
the result Of an untimely explosion Of a
blast. The accident occurred on May
%, 1903. The plaintiff was employed
as a quarryman, and while so engaged
an unexpected explosion occurred, Ia
cerating his right arm so badly as to
NA~e
right jaw, destroying the sight Of both
eyes, and otherwise bruising and Grip
pling him, rendering him unable to
make a living, etc. He charged care
lessness and negligence on the part
of the company in providing him with
defective tools and appliances The
jury found for the plaintiff in the
sum Of $4,000. Messrs. Geo. w. S.
Hart and D. w. Robinson for plaintiff,
and A. G. Brice and W. B. Wilson for
defendant.
The next case taken up was that
Of w. C. Latimer vs.. the York Cotton
Mills. This case has been on hand for
more than a year. AS the result Of
the first trial the jury found for the
plaintiff in half the amount sued for.
The defendant appealed and got new
trial. There was another hearing at
the last November term as the result
Of which the jury returned a verdict
for the plaintiff in the sum Of $50.
Judge Townsend granted a new trial
OF VI tAe pidlllliL oho LII"
third presentation Of the issues to the
jury was commenced yesterday after
noon. The plaintiff claims to have en-
tered into a contract with the defen-
dant to give his services for a year;
he afterward presented himself to do
such work as might be required OF
him; but the defendant having changed
it's plans failed to stand up to its part
of the alleged contract. The plaintiff
therefore claimed a full years pay,
while the defendant held that under
no circumstances was he entitled to
claim pay for more than a single month.
The contract alleged by the plaintiff
alleged a promised salary Of 5000 per
annum. The case was being argued
When THE ENQUIRER went to press.
TRANSFERS OF REAL ESTATE.
The following transfers Of real es-