The Fargo forum and daily republican. [volume] (Fargo, N.D.) 1894-1957, 1910-02-07

In granting the motion OF the defens,
for judgment notwithstanding the 81, 0ot
verdict Of the jury. in the case OF Ada
lynn M. snider against A. A. snidei
and wife, Judge Chas. A. Pollock said:
am satisfied that / should have
granted the motion made at the close
OF the plaintiffs case to instruct thu
jury for the defendant. / am equally
satisfied that I should have granted
the motion made at the close of the
entire case, and I would have done Sd
bur for the fact that under our pres.
ent procedure by carrying the case
| on and securing a verdict OF Jury
upon the question OF damages. the re-
trial or the possible re-trial of this &C
ton can be prevented. In other words:
This trial has now lasted five or six
days, costing as II has the time and
attention of the court for this long
time. 1t has likewise, Of course, put
the litigants to all their expense OF
the trial. Now, IL the court was in
error in his Judgment that he should
have granted this motion, then, with
out a verdict of the Jury, the case
would have had to be tried all over
again, thus putting the county, as well
as the litigants, to all the expense OF
re-trial. Such being the case, II
seemed to me that in the interests
of economy the court ought to let the
case go to the jury to get the assess
ment OF damages, If any
/ am of the opinion. in addition to
what I shall now further state with
reference to the facts and the law, that
the damages awarded are too great,
even if the verdict could be allowed
under the law, to stand and the. court
is Of the opinion that he would be
required to reduce the damages
think there has been an entire
misrepresentation upon the part OF the
jury OF the nature Of this cause of
action / am not speaking by way of
criticism upon the acts of the jury
and I trust all the jurors present will
not misunderstood what / say. The
case, from the standpoint OF the law
and the facts, Is quite complicated,
and am not surprised that Jurors,
unaccustomed to weighing evidence
and TO bringing together evidence with
the law, applying one to the other,
might fall in error. You have UNI
doubtedly, gentlemen of the jury,
found your verdict conscientiously,
and as you deemed to be correct un-
der the law, and in so doing you full
fill your sworn obligation. There is,
however, an obligation resting upon
the court, just as sacred, just as high,
and just as important as that which
rests upon you. and when I say this
with reference to this verdict and with
reference to the duty falling upon the
court, ] am only Saying that, the jury
having no right to shrink from their
duty, much less has the court a right
to shrink from any duty which falls
upon him, however unpleasant it may
be.
Real Question at Issue.
What is the charge here? What is
the thing for which this woman sues
these people? What have they done
upon which she has a right to pre-
dictate an action for damages? She
claims in her, complaint that the
father and the mother have alienared
the affections Of her husband from
her. That they kept him away from
her, and that, therefore, she does not
1AAJOy Zig A0BGs Supp0TLs care anu DTO-
lection, ETC., OF her husband. Now,
that is the charge. She does not
charge these people and could not ur1-
der the law, with having broken any
contract That is not what this ques-
ton Is. II the defendants in this ac-
ton have made contract with this
party plaintiff which they have broken,
the courts are open to her for a suit
upon that contract. So then, the real
question to be determined is clearly
defined. What Is the thing wherein
these parents have done q legal
wrong to this plaintiff? / recounted
them a moment ago. Now, have these
facts been proven? Has she the az
lection and the love of her husband?
II she has, why, OF course, she hasn't
been deprived of them, and IL she has
not been deprived of them, then her
action must absolutely fall, 1t matters
not how many contracts, IL any, the de-
PENDANTS may or might have made
What evidence Is there before the
court that this woman has nor the
love and affection of her husband?
did not stop in the course of the
trial to hear much OF the argument
upon the motions as made. knew
that the case would be argued to the
jury in case / let IL go to the Jury,
so that / could listen to the argu-
ments which were made to the Jury
as well as those made to the court
I listened and listened in vain TO find
the proofs which were adduced that
the plaintiff has lost the love of her
husband. She herself testifes-I took
1t down as she gave Ii from the stand
Up to March 1909 my husbands
love for me was as great as 1t ever
was" Now the fact that he hadn't
been with her only three years during
their married life cuts no figure.
suppose there was any number of
travelling men of whom, lie you would
count UP the time they are absent
from home in any given year,you could
say they were not with their wives
much of the time, but who ever heard
Of the wife of travelling man saying
that because her husband was absent
from her in the ordinary course of
his business, therefore his love and
affection had departed? No That is
not the case, and 1t is not the case ac-
cording to her own testimony. So,
IL the love and affection of this man
was taken from her, 1t must have been
after March 1909 and may say
parenthetically that. before that time
I have scanned this record In vain
to find the slightest evidence of any
thing other than the most cordial re-
cations existing between the father
and mother and this plaintiff. save
possibly the little incident where the
xxNA
wasn't overly pleased with the baby
w.-r.g1~x. 80 rnxaxas ~.yaa 14ur.Y%nN r v,-aa -