Wood County reporter. [volume] (Grand Rapids [i.e. Wisconsin Rapids], Wis.) 1857-1923, 1906-06-07
A NUMBER OF
CASES DISPOSED OF
Circuit Court has Finished
With the Jury Cases. will
Probably be Tried Later in
the Month.

Ali the cases on the circuit court
calender that are not settled this
week Will probably lay over a week, or
until Judge Webb gets through
with the term in Adams county. The
judge will then return to this city
and the probability is that the balance
of June will be takon up in disposing
of the cases that remain. 1t was
thought at the outset that this term
of the circuit court would be a short
one, but Q number of cases of i'm
portance have consumed more time
than it was expected that they would,
and as a consequence the term has
been a long one.
The following disposition has been
made of number of the cases:
The case Of Walter BeilfuSS vs..
| RoedeS Lumber & Veneer Co. was
continued over the term.
j. w. Plank Co. VS.. D. NJ GlaSsner
has been settled. Anton Brodkorb
VS.. Henry Ulrich is a default. JOHN
w. Knepper ct. al. VS.. John Clapper,
ct. al. was default case. E. ]. Bretz
VS.. r. COnnor Co. went over the
term. D. D. Kennedy VS.. C. r.
Goldsworthy settled.
In the case Of Jesse J. Chapel
VS.. G. r. Goldsworthy the jury
brought in verdict last week
Iof ''no cause of action.n This
case was brought by the defendant,
to recover damages said to be caused
by the defendant as result of falsely
representing the earning capacity of a
summer resort owned by the defen-
dant, and run during 1905 by the
plaintiff. The plaintiff set up q
number of allegations on which he
expected to recover but the testimony
disclosed only tine one point on which
the jury could decide. Goggins &
Brazeau were the attorneys for the
defendant.
The plaintiff in the case of the
Omega Separator Co. vs.. G. F. Wells,
aad his boIdsmen, S. M. Baum and
G. A. Ludewig, was given the verdict
by the jury. This case was brought
for the recovery of the price of sepd-
rators sold to the defendant, and
which he claimed were only held by
him as agent for the plaintiff. The
jury took the view of the plaintiff
however, and directed payment for
the separators. This developed some
very fine points of law, and raised
questions of constitutionality. 1t
was stated that there were brought
out in the trial of this case more
| technical points of law than in any
other case tried in the circuit court at
this place. We understand that
motion for new trial will be made
in this case. Attorney D. d. Con-
way appeared for the plaintiff and
was assisted by Attorney D. A. Grady.
of Portage.
| Goggins & BraZeau secured verdict
OF $3.50 for the plaintiff in the case Of
Nicholas Schamper VS.. Henry Ulrich.
The plaintiff in this case claimed that
he was entitled to recover back
moneys paid by him to the defendant
on farm near the village of Ne
koosa. This money was paid by the
| plaintiff by the execution of a NOR
tage on his Chicago home and for
| which, he claimed he did not receive
what the defendant porported to sell
him. The jury took the virsion of
the plaintiff. D. d. Conway, the
attorney for the defendant will ask
for new trial as his client was un-
able to be present. In case a new
trial is denied the case will be
appealed to the supreme court.
Attorney d. H. Grady, of Portage
assisted Mr.. Conway in the trial OF
this case.
| The jury brought in a verdict 10
favor Of the plaintiff in the case Of
Owen Oliver, ct. al. VS.. John Katy.
This case was for commissions said to
be due for the sale Of real estate.