Montour American. (Danville, Pa.) 1866-1920, 1910-11-10

- -
is responsible for three ON this basis
Mr. HinckIey said the defendant is
responsible for three.ciRhths of the
damage done The loss sustained by
the plaintiff had been variously esti-
mated by the witnesses 10 All the way
from $500 to $1,000
The damage therefor. might be fixed
~ three eiRhths OF a.. 600 or s2,2J0. to
which as = compensation for delay
might be added another amount not to
exceed six per cent. OF the sum each
year for the time embraced, six years.
Immediately on reconvening after
the noon intcrmission Judge Evans
charged the jury. lie reviewed all the
testimony and applied the points of
law. which had been argue Il and allow.
ed The charge was comprehensive
and clear
Coal miners, he said, have right
To deposit culm on their land. protect
ed against all ordinary flood, They
have no right, however. to deposit
culm in stream. The burden is on
the plaintiff to show that the defend
ant either placed culm in the creek or
so near to it that ordinary floods car
ried it away. If culm was placed in
the creek by other companies the de-
fendant is not responsible for the dam
age done by it.
If it is found that the damage sus-
tanned by the plaintiff was caused by
a large number of mines, the colliery
of the Lehigh and Wilkes Barre Coal
company being responsible for only an
inconsiderable part, then the defend
ant can be held only for nominal dam
age, which may be ten cents or one
dollar
The plaintiff claims permanent in
jury. If she has failed to prove per
manent injury there can be no recov-
cry beyond nominal damages.
3 In all cases the jury was to be gov
erned by the preponderance of testi-
mony. The verdict, the court explain
ed, might be for the defendant; for
nominal damages or for compensatory
damages the latter representing the
full extent of injury to the farm.
Verdict for the Plaintiff.
The jury in the case of Sophie G
Eckman VS.. the Lehigh & Wilkes
Barre Coal Company, the trial of
which occupied practically the entire
week, rendered a verdict Saturday in
favor of the plaintiff for S1417. II. The
jury, which retired at , O'Clock Fri
day afternoon, reached an agreement
! at II O'Clock that night. Following
instructions the verdict was sealed
and presented to court at 10 O'Clock
Saturday morning.
The jury found as follows: First.
That the total damage sustained by
the plaintiff is $4,000
Second. That the proportion for
which the defendant in this suit is
liable is Sll42. S5
Third. Amount allowed the plain
tiff for detention of payment of dam
ages, S214 -.
Fourth. Torai amount of verdict of
plaintiff iu rh" case against the de-
f,uoar, j. ..- II.
Nhrn tie ,r,nlct was announced
William ka.a West of counsel for de-
tenjaut moved f"r Judgment non OBJ
>tautr we're Gjetu upon the whole Iec-
oIu. winch lran>inred into language
tlay .avmcu can understand means
that the defendant claims that the
evidence adducCd at the trial was not
sufficient to warrant tinbing for the
plaintiff and that the verdict should
have been for the defendant
Thus was brought to conclusion
one of the most noteworthy civil suits
that has been tried IN the Montour
county court in many years The jury
all told was on duty eighteen days
Six days wer5 occupied in the local
court during the progress of the trial.
| Twelve days were spent in viewing
the farm of the plaintiff at Roaring
Greek and in making tour of the
coal regions to investigate conditions
at the mines with reference to the
care of coal dirt. Some six hundred
dollars were required TO pay off the
jurors Saturday.