Willmar tribune. [volume] (Willmar, Minn.) 1895-1931, 1905-07-05
DISTRICT ! ] COURT
eierra!l Cases Disposed Of During
1.-THE Last Week,,-C Court Still
d in Session. E. !. Z. !. Z.

Ea$ =. 4 Z
the Last Week Court Still
in Session. I ...;= q !: H..
HE following cases have been dis
posed OF up to the time OF going 10
prsss: E @ *>= /. .$,=ss .s.'. ..s.sS y. ..
City OF Willmar VS. Samuel Osmund-
son. Samuel Porter attorney for the
City. " . ..: # j: -. .... u.
Stricken from the calendar on mo-
tton of the city attorney. = n .:s=
Thor Evenson VS.. E lam P Storaker
and Tilla Storaker. Attorneys,
Charles Johnson; George Muller.
Settled and dismissed without cost
to5either party. I .~::*. ... ".
Lars Halvorson vs.. W. W. knight
1nd j. ). Downs. Attorneys, Samuel
Olaon, Samuel Porter; Geo. II. Otter
ness, John M. Downs. D.
50 Dismissed without cost or disbue Sc
>ments to either party. .>*',@'.s.< ~
Ss State OF Minnosota VS.. Joseph Nc
=Namara. Attorneys, County Attor-
ney; Ray G. Harrington. +
SIS Settled and dismissed. ...
In the matter of the petition of Her.
man Wegner, ct al, for the construc!
q tJn OF a public ditch In the counties
Of KandiyohiS and Stearns. Att0r-
ne1s, Frank sTOlman for Petitioners;
Samuel Porter for Contestants,
The petition asking that judicial
ditch be constructed, beginning in the
northwest corner of town of Roseville,
thence running southeast and empty
ing Into Grow River, stearns county,
was filed year ago. The ditch was
surveyed by B. F.; Jenness in Sep.
tember and the viewers filed their re-
port In November. The final hearing
was held before Judge Qyale December
y and it was then agreed between the
attorneys for the petitioners and the
contestants that the question of the
utility of the ditch and the question
81. damages should be submitted to q
jury. The case was continued from
the January term of court and was
tried at this term. The total amount
Of benefits returned by the viewer was
81, ,427 and this was reduced by the
jury by the sum OF 1927, thus leaving
the total amount: of benefits o., ,20O
The contestants claimed damages in
the sum of %, 100, but they were allowed
no damages. The estimated cost of
the ditch was 81, 500. The verdict re-
turned by the jury reads as follows.
I'VE The jury lin pAnsle TO try:: the
Z. uss inS5taa . tisivI ~ anti led =amstter
ind that The establishments and con-
struction of the ditch proposed by the
petitioners will be of public utility
and should be established and con.
structed. We furthermore find that
the following persons will receive
benefits in the amounts as follows:
c.. F. Wendtlund, $500; Justina w.
Blakely, $50; S. P. Roach, ss4;. Will
lam Kruger, $l00; q. F. Sheldon, as;
Susan Roach and S. z. Roach, $50;
J. J. Carlock, 1884," .....
The final arguments in the case will
be heard before Judge Qvale on or
some time after August 16.
William Windhorst VS.. John Eu.
ling and Maggie Euling. Attorneys,
J. M. Freeman; N. L. Ericsson.
Continued by consent. -,
M. L. VanSlyke vs.. G. B.. Daniel
son. Attorneys, G. N. Andrews; r.
L. Penney. -
This was an action brought by Van
Slyke, q merchant of Gilmore, against
Danielson, a farmer of town of Gen.
nessee, to recover the sum. of Sc, 600,
due him for stock OF goods. The
details of the affair are as follows:
Last fall Danielson listed his land
(240 acres valued at e45 an acre with
the Anderson Land Co. Of this city,
desiring to effect sale or to exchange
his farm for . stock of general mer-
chandise. After some advertising the
Anderson Land company received a
letter from Van Slyke stating that he
had . stock of goods at Walnut
Grove, Mimi, which he desired to ex-
change for real estate. Accordingly
Mr.. Anderson and MIR. Danielson pro-
ceeded to Walnut Grove, where after
an inspection of the goods trade was
effected between, Danielson and Van
Slyke. According to the terms of the
contract Danielson was to take full
possession of the goods, these to be
valued at $6, 600, in lieu of which be
was to deed his lands valued at $40, 500,
with mortgages amounting to-. $4,800,
to Van Slyke. When Van .Slyke de-
manded that the contract be fulfilled,
Danielson refused to do so, claiming
that he had been defrauded inasmuch
as the stock of goods was not worth
S6 ,0OO. He furthermore asked that
the contract be rescinded, but this Van
slyke positively refuseA to do, where.
upon legal proceedings were com.
menced. The testimony introduced
at the trial partly supported MIR. Dan,
ielson . contention that the goods
were not worth s6 200. Mr.. Marden,
an auctioneer from Marshall, stated
that In his Judgment the stock waa
worth not moro than %, 600. It seemed