Ottumwa tri-weekly courier. [volume] (Ottumwa, Iowa) 1903-1916, 1906-08-30
CASE AGAINST CHICAGO, MILWAU,
kEE & ST. PAUL COMPANY
DISMISSED
Terms of Settlement Are Not Made
PubIIc-Relieved that Morgan Sc
cured Generous concession-other
Court News.

wa
pany has at last been settled by an
suit and Monday afternoon was or
dered dismissed by Judge G. w. Yer
million. The stipulation of file does
not give any detailed terms of the set
Element. When questioned this morn
ing the attorneys on both sides refused
to make any statement as to these
terms but it is understood that Mr..
Morgan was quite literally dealt with
by the railroad company.
Has Been Hard Fought.
This case has attracted much atten-
ton and has been one of the hardest
fought of any in recent history Of the
Wapello county district court.
The first trial was begun November
18, 1905, and on November "a the jury
was discharged.
The jury in the second trial was
empaneled and sworn in January 20
and the hearing of evidence began the1
following day. At the close of the
testimony two days were spent in ar
guing the motion for a directed verdict
made by the attorneys for the defend
ant company. The motion was over
ruled and was followed by eloquent
and mastery arguments to the jury.
The attorneys in the case were ]. j.
Smith and J. w. Lewis for the plain
tiff and Jaques & Jaques and JudgesC.
c. Cook for the defense.
History of the Case.
Charles Morgan, a motorman in the
employ of the Ottumwa Traction &
Light company, while running an open
car on the Sheridan avenue line one
afternoon in August. 1904, was injured
in a collision with box car being
pushed across Sheridan avenue by a
Milwaukee engine on the Wabash
track. He was taken to the hospital
where it was later found necessary to
amputate his leg. The suit against the
railroad company was for $1,000 dam
ages.
The Disputed Point.
| The question over which the most
controversy resulted in the two trials
was that of contributory negligence.
In the motion for a directed verdict,
the attorneys for the defense advanced
the claim that the motorman was gull
ty of contributory negligence, and
therefore, not entitled to recover dam
ages, because he did not take such pre-
cautions in crossing the track as an or
dinarily prudent man would,
that he should have been ex-
pecting a train to cr,ss
at any time and should either have
stopped and looked or have had his
car under such control that he could
bring it to stop at the first appear
ance of danger,
The claim Of the plaintiff was that
the Wabash track across Sheridan
avenue was so seldom used that it was
not to be expected that motorman
would stop the street car every time
he was about to cross the track Evil
dence was introduced to show that the
car was running at about twelve miles
an hour and that Mr. Morgan, whose
view Of the track was obstructed by
houses and trees along the street.
made good stop as soon as he saw
the train crossing the street. 1t was
the claim of the plaintiff that the en-
ployes of the defendant company were
negligent in not taking proper precau
lions in crossing the street where a
car was passing every ten minutes.
| Vic odIItCy SdoC SStliCQ.
The case of the First National bank
of Chicago versus the Janney Manuf
acturing company, asking judgment
for $500 because of an alleged bal
ance due on promissory note, the
Judgment aided by an attachment was
: settled and dismissed yesterday. The
counter claim in this action of NJ H
Janney for $4,000 because of damages
alleged to have been sustained by
wrongful suing out of attachment was
also settled.
Grand Jury Selected.
The grand jury was chosen at II
o'clock this morning, on challenges tt
those selected being filed.
The following are the grand juror!
chosen: G. H. Chisman, Rural Rout,
No. 4; s. l.. Cohagan, Blakesburg; ]
/ w. Jordan, Ottumwa; Jacob Lowen
berg Rural Route No. 1; Leander Pow
elson. Batavia; D. M. Sackett, Chilli
7 cothe; Simeon Wittenmyer, Kirkville
D. M. Sackett was appointed as fore
: man of the jury.
Assignment of Cases.
! Yesterday afternoon the assignmen
! of cases printed below was made out
, A number of probate matters wer
: considered and few cases taken ur
: The case Of U. l.. Harlan VS.. Car
i N. Hopkins. ct al, injunction, was dis
!. missed at the plaintiffs cost.
i. L. I. Minnick VS.. w. E. McVey, ct a
a foreclosure, was dismissed at tn
: plaintiffs cost.
j D. Y Kennedy VS.. J. w. Smith. e
9 al, suit on note, was settled and dis
t missed.
n This Afternoon.
9 This afternoon, being the second al
3 ternoon of the term, was devoted i
$ part TO the defaults in number q
g cases. A large number of divorc
: suits are also being heard this after
!, noon.
. chancery Assisnment-First Week.
l. Wednesday, Aug. 20
r No 5655-Calvin Manning VS., Nanni
l. B. Manning, admrx, ct al.
= No. 620S-G- n. Friend VS.. Fran
Koht.