The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1910-06-07
.BUYEROF FURNACE
COMES OUT AHEAD
Gets His Money Back, Released
From Debt and Has
the Furnace.
CASES IN SUPREME COURT
Three Writs of Error Allowed,
While Three Are
Refused.
CASES IN SUPREME COURT

Perhaps the first case on record in
which a purchaser of furnace got
even with the man who sold him the
thing is recorded in suit in which
the Supreme Court yesterday refused
to grant writ OF error. The jury
in this trial found verdict for the
defendant. who was the purchaser, in
an amount equal to the value of the
whole thing, leaving the sellers up IL
tree.
In two other civil cases writs were
refused. while in three they were al
lowed.
The furnace case makes amusing
reading. although 1t was doubtless
anything but funny TO any of the par
ticipants. Tho compliments in both
courts were b. ]. Doherty and C. NJ.
Casey, doing business as Doherty 6
Casey. With these names it is not
found a purchaser In r. j. Flaherty.
To him they sold furnace which was
guaranteed to do certain things, such
as heat his house in proper manner.
He paid part of the purchase price.
Had His Troubles.
Flaherty pleaded set-off In dam
ages and dlscomforts caused by the
object which he had purchased. and
further claimed that the furnace had
not come up to the advance notices
The jury. some of whose mersbers had
bought furnaces during the courses OF
their natural lives, found a verdict
against Flaherty for about $3.50. the
balance he owed. but at the same time
found a verdict lagainst Doherty &
Casey for an amount equal TO the
original sale price of the machine.
They We're very much aggrieved at
this. They asked the supreme Court
what they were supposed TO get out
of 1t. since they were minus one fur
mace, and were required to refund to
Flaherty what he had paid, In the
meantime the furnace is in Flaherty's
house, and 1t is supposed he can get
more damages IL they disturb him
by taking il out. The Supreme Court
couldn't see what it could do about
it.
Nicholson Brothers drew a blank In
their appeal from q decision in suit
which they had brought against Chas.
Wanker's heirs at law. The property
involved was In receivers hands.
and the question was one of ju-
risdiction in matter in which the
sheriff was appointed administrator of
an estate.
Suit for Damages.
Viola Davis, a colored girl, was re-
fused i writ of error from a de-
cision of the Circuit Court OF Mecklen-
burg county. She sued the Southern
Railway for damages. and was given
$1,000. subject TO a decision on a de-
murrer. This demurrer was sus-
tanned.
The child had been sent to the post
office at Union Level. While cross
ing a railroad track she was run down
by an engine running backward and
badly injured,
Fred Schwab was granted writ OF
error in his case against the Wash
ington Luna Park Company, from the
Circuit Court of Alexandria county
schwab ran an aerial swing for the
defendant company. Three trolleys
slipped off at once. and while trying
to arrange matters his foot was caught
in cogs, with the result that he lost
his foot and part of his leg above
the ankle. Upon the trial of his suit
the court sustained demurrer pro-
duced by the defendant.
The claim was made that he was not
supposed to fix matters If all three
trolleys slipped off at once, but in
such case 1t was his duty to hun,
did not see that this was the thing
to do. while women were swinging
high in the air in the darkness
Construction OF VIII.
In the case of Ellen D. Goldsborough
and MARI M. Boyd against Euphan
and others, a writ of error
was granted to judgment Of the Cir
cult Court of Mathews county Tho
whole question is over the construc-
ton of the will of William H. Roy, who
died possessed of considerable prop
erty. It is commended that it was his
evident intention to provide equally for
his two sets of children by different
but that he has failed 70
do SO practically While the two elder
children. 1t Is argued. took their ahso-
lutte estate, that of the others is I'M
determined and must remain SO until
at least two of them die.
The City National Bank of Roanoke
got a. write from a decision of the
Circuit Court OF Henry county. The
bank, it appears, had purchased a note
for $500, with interest, subject to two
credits of s66 each, with number Of
indorsers. The defense was that these
had been procured By fraud
ulent Misrepresentation on the part of |
the payee. a Judgment for the defend
ants was set aside as to two of them,
H. B. Hundley and It. N, Barbour, on
evidence tending to show that they had
received considerations from the note.
+ . + 3 I = 4. 3