The Denison review. [volume] (Denison, Iowa) 1867-current, 1905-02-01
Judge Powers Pushes Work to
Completion.
NEDDEMYER CASE A DRAW.
Detailed Account of Court Proceedings
Mich Business & Transacted in a
Short Time. Docket Well Cleared.

of last week. The county changed the
location of the highway past the plain
tiff's farm in Charter Oak township,
and in the change took about an acre
and quarter of Neddermeyer's land.
Neddermeyer claimed that by reason
of the changein the highway he was
unable to drive his cattle across the
railroad track to his pasture and corn
stocks, without great danger OF having
his stock killed, thus necessitating the
employment of extra help to carry on
the business of his farm: also that the
county had made sharp angle in the
road which made it Impossible to drive
around the curve with four t.orse
team, and he asked $4,000 damages.
Ths court instructed the jury that they
must find for the plaintiff in some
amount, and submitted to them form
of verdict leaving blank space for the
jury to fill in the amount. The jury.
however. stayed out until 4 o'clock Sat-
urday morning and returned a sealed
verdict. When the court opened the
verdict it was found that the jury had
simply signed the blank verdict with
out filling in any amount. A motion
for new trial will undoubtedly be FL
ed.
O. j. PETIT vs. IS. Vengrovitch was
tried to the court. the jury being waiv-
ed. PETIT borrowed $4,000 from Ven
grovitch of Dow City and gave him
mortgage on his farm. Vengrovitch
gave PETIT check on Green's Exchange
Bank for the money, and the next day
when Petit went to the bank to get the
money on the check the bank was
closed Petit then demanded the re-
turn of his note and mortgage. but
Vergrovitch refused to give them up
and transferred toa third party and
Petit had them to pay, so PETIT brought
action against Vengrovitch to recover
back the money. Vengrovitch con.
tended that if PETIT had presented the
check on the day he received it he
would have received the money, and
PETIT was therefore negligent and &c
blame for the nonpayment of the check.
Petit claimed, however, that he did not
receive the check until after banking
hours. The court found that the plain.
III ~ ! erssc1 anu gave MN Judgment .for
the amount claimed.
-.
Gustav Jeschke VS. Reinhard Jesch
Ike; Judgment for plaintiff for $435 90
per cent interest.
Monheimer & Co. VS. Marcus Hors,
judgment for plaintiff on account o
$22884, per cent interest.
John Claussen vs. Max Stickelburg
judgment for plaintiff on itemized &c
count for S44.1O; per cent interest.
Schmidt & Henry Mfg. Co. VS. L. E
Anthony; judgment for plaintiff on al
account for S303.26. per cent interest
Miller, Stewart & Beaton Furnitur,
& Carpet Co. VS. L E. Anthony; judg
ment for plaintiff on an account fo
S72.02, 6 per cent interest.
Geo. r. Knight vs. Hannah Nissel
and Miss Nissen; judgment for plaintiff
on promissory note for $35l.58, pc
cent interest.
Schmitt & Henry Mfg Co. vs. T. E
Shaw; judgment for plaintiff on accoun
for $120.77, 6 per cent interest.
A. F. Kadoch VS. r. G. Jescnke; judg
for ,1oir
for $3.50. IS, 8 per cent interest.
P. w. Harding, Trustee, VS. Herr
Hoefer; Judgment for plaintiff on prom
issory note for s567,7S, s per cent in
terest.
Divorces were granted to the plain
tiffs in the following cases, the defen
dants failing to appear and make de
Tense.
Silence Daz VS. Albert Daz, desertion
Marilda Matthews VS. Oliver Ma
thews, desertion.
Martha Dederick VS. T. j. Dederick
habitual drunkenness.
Aleneda Denison VS. Alva Fl. Denisou
desertion.
In the cases of Chas. w. Betsche 1
Co. and Bonderot, Chase & Co. VS. Hen
ry Hoefer, Julius Clausen, garnishee
the garnishee answered that he ha
about 1900 bushels of corn in his pos
session belonging to the defendant
The court ordered the garnishee Il
turn over to the sheriff enough of tn
corn to pay the judgments of the plain
tiffs in both cases.
Matilda Groth VS. John Groth; plain
tiff was given judgment for possession
of household goods. Mrs. Groth ais
obtained divorce last week.
In the case of Ellis VS. the Bulletin
Publishing Co. the plaintiff has filed
motion for change Of venue on tn
ground that he cannot obtain fai
trial in Crawford county on account q