The Bennington evening banner. (Bennington, Vt.) 19??-1961, 1909-07-26
DR. WELLINGTON ENJoINED
son-ln-Law of M. J. Hapsood in Med
ical Controversy

oon-ln-LdW u W. y. 1dPSooC IN WED
ical Controversy
Brattleboro, July 24.-Two interest
ing bills in chancery have been filed
in the county clerks Office within a
few days and injunctions have been
served in both cases. One case is
that of DR.. Alexander Borland of So.
Londonderry against DR.. Benjamin F..
Millington of the same village. In
that case Dr. Millington mas been en-
joined from continuing the practice of
his profession in Londonderry or ad-
joining towns and from interfering by
speech or otherwise with the good
will of the business of physician and
surgeon which it is claimed he sold
to DR.. Borland until further order of
court. The injunction order was is
sued by Judge f. NJ. Butler. DR.. Bor-
land formerly lived in Mt. Holly He
claims that on June II, 1908 he
bought Dr. Millington's homestead in
South Londonderry for $4,000 and that
the two doctors entered into an agree
ment, which Is made a part of the bill
of complaint, whereby DR.. Millington
was to turn over the good will and
practice of his profession as a physic-
ian and surgeon in Londonderry and
that locality as early as it reasonably
could be done
The agreement was that they should
practice together as partners so long
as tney should mutually agree there
TO, sharing the profits under a speci-
fed schedule the partnership to be
managed with the design and purpose
of introducing Dr. Borland to DR.. Mil
lington's patients. DR.. Borland claims
further that DR.. Millington agreed
that after the dissolution of the part
nership Dr. Millington would surren-
der his practice and would not locate
for practice in Londonderry or any
adjoining town. He claims that the
partnership was dissolved February
II and that since then DR.. Millington
has continued his practice as former
ly and that he has obstructed DR.. BOr-
land in securing the patronage of for
mer patients by reason of inimical,
hostile and unfriendly conduct" tow
ard the complainant in depreciation
of his medical skill and knowledge
and of his inability to correctly dag
prescribe for and treat the same"
Haskins & Schwenk of Brattleboro
are solicitors for the complainant.
The other case is that of Adeline o.
Andrews of Dover and Charles A.
Stokes guardian of her husband, Her
bert p. Andrews, against Alya J.. Can
edy of Dover. Judge Butter has is
sued an injunction order restraining
Mr. Canedy from disposing of certain
land which he procured of Mr. and
Mrs. Andrews until further order of
court. Stokes and Mrs Andrews claim
that Mr. Andrews has been mentally
incapable for several years of taking
care of himself and property. Mr.
Stocks was appointed his guardian on
July 10.
He claims that about June 9 Mr.
Canedy knowing of Mr.. Andrews con
dition proposed to Mr.. Andrews to
trade the defendants place in West
Dover village for the socalled Pease
property, consisting of six and half
acres in Dover, which Mrs. Andrews
bought last April with $3.50 belonging
to herself and husband. He says that
with such fine speech and with many
silken yarns" Mr.. Canedy tried to con
vince Mr.. Andrews that the West Do
yer property was much more valuable
and told him that the water on the
village lot was OF excellent quality.
He says that Mrs. Andrews acting
under threats and menaces on the
part of her husband, joined in deciding
the Pease property for the Canedy
property. He says the Canedy prop
erty is not worth half as much as the
Pease property and that the water on
tae Canedy property was condemned
by the local board of health two years
ago and that Mr. Canedy since then
has procured water for domestic pur-
poses from his neighbors' water sup
ply. o. f. Butteriield of Wilmington
is solicitor for the complainants.