Waterbury evening Democrat., 1904-12-28
$sO FOR HISS WHELAN.
Wins Seit Against Trolley cO.-Old
 Partners Go to Law.

d .
 Miss Bridget Whelan can recover $50 and her costs of court from the Connecticut Railway and Lighting Co for the damages she claims to have res eeiyed by coming in contact with live electric wire. The decision i'll the case, which was heard last month ih the superior court, was received by Clerk Marsh today. In the memoran- dunn accompanying it the court gives very big whack to the practice of de faulting cases to the jury and then trying them on their merits to the { court. The memorandum is as fol- lows:
 This action was brought for damages claimed to have been sustained by the plaintiff by contact with live wire of the defendant company. The electric. current from the street or primary wires of the defendant company passed through n transformer into the sec, ondary wires (connected with the house where the plaintiff was living when injured) in such q manner as to step down the circuit from the prl, mary to the secondary wires at 2O to 1 ratio.
 The main or primary wires at the time of the accident were charged with current of 2,0S0 volts, which is high ly dangerous, and liable to prove fataA to anyone coming in contact with them.
 The secondary wires from the trans former to the house were only charged with the comparatively harmless cuh, rent of 1O4 volts.
 The defendant by fair preponder. ance of evidence demonstrated that from the location. arrangement and condition of it's wires the plaintiff could not have sustained m electric shock by coming in contact with one of tha wires. causing her to fall through the window where she claimed she was standing just before she was injured: 1t therefore appears that the plaintln has suffered no damage from any neg" Igent act of the defendant upon which she has based her action therefore judgment is rendered for the plaintim to recover nominal damages in the sum of $50 and costs.
 This Judgment of $50 and costs IS not the valuation which the court places upon the damages sustained py the plaintiff. If that question were to be determined by the court a much larger sum would be awarded, as the evidence showed that the plaintiff was very seriously injured, but this is hearing in damages after demurrer oyerrules. and in q proceeding of this character the damages are not fixed or proven, and the defendant is permitted to show all the circumstances attenuz ing the injury for the purpose of show ing that none but nominal damages can be given.
 Under our procedure, in hearings Of this nature the defendant is . titled to show that the plaintiff had no cause of action; that, in point of fact, the plain tiff would not be entitled to recover anything if the pleadings had been such as to permit judgment for the
 RoRABAcK. Judge.
 John T. Geraghty has brought suit against his old friend, John $. Neagle, for $2,000 damages. The papers i'll the case were returned to the superior court to-day and they show that o1A Auaust i 1S99. the plaintiff and de- fendant formed partnership i'll the fire insurance business, each to pay aIl equal share Of the expenses of the business. On September i of this year they dissolved partnership.
 According to the papers, the plaintiff paid all the claims against the part nerghip, which amounted to more than s1.O00, and the. defendant has collected premiums belonging to the firm and did not make an accounting of them.
 There was no settlement made when the partnership was dissolved and the plaintiff claims there is now due, him about $1 200.
 The defendant refused to pay or make an accounting and the platntifr now asks for partition of certain piece of land which they jointly own on North Vine street.
 If a partition of this property cannot be made without Injury to either party then the plaintiff asks that it be sold.
 The plaintiff asks for an accountinS and the above named sum in damages. Attorney Russell represents the plain tiff in the case.
 The sale of the effects of the Hotel Connecticut was to take place to-day, but. by order of State Referee Newton, it has been postponed to next Tues day.
 The petition of Christian Delkes- camp for the removal of his son Adolph, aged i've years, from the cus- tody of his mother, was given . hear ing to-day before Judge Lowe in the jury room of the superior court room. sshe hearing was private as it was thought a good deal of testimony of a rather startling nature would be given. Attorneys Bauby and Kelley appeared for the petition, and Mrs DeIkescamp was represented by At forney Russell. Delkescamp alleges that his wife is an improper person to have the custody of the boy.
 HAMPSON-SELLEW %.