The citizen. (Frederick City, Md.) 1895-1923, 1910-02-18
Circuit Court.


and Annie Leatherman, VS.. the w. F.
g. G. r. R. Co., was concluded in the
Circuit Court few days ago, and at
the conclusion of the evidence, the
counsel for the railroad company offered
prayer that there was not sufficient
evidence to recover damages, which was
sustained by the court, and the jury
rendered a verdict accordingly. Reno
S. Harp represented the Leathermans
and Coblentz, Waters and Brown repre-
scented the railroad company.
The case of Charles Clarke VS.. Will
liam Morrison, an appeal from the de-
cision of Justice M. F. Snuff, was taken
up before the court. The case was
suit to recover 5000 alleged to be due
on property sold by Mr.. Morrison, as
signee, to Mr.. Clark. Counsel for Mr..
Clark entered plea as to the iurisdic-
ton of the court, which was held sub
curia. E. L. Rowe represented Mr..
Clarke and Vincent Sebold represented
Mr.. Morrison.
The case of Ivy A. Strawsburg VS.
Marshall Smith, an appeal from the de-
cision of Justice c. H. Eckstein, was
taken up before the jury. The case was
an action of replevin for the recovery of
a brood SOW, valued at about $50. The
SOW is claimed by Mrs. Strawsburg.
of near New Midway. The hog was
replevined by Mrs. Strawsburg The
verdict Of the lower court was in favor
of Mr.. Smith The jury after being out
for about half an hour returned with
verdict of one cent for Mrs. Strawsburg.
d. Princeton Buckley represented Mrs.
Strawsburg and Stoner and Weinberg
represented Mr.. Smith.
The case of the Washington, Frederick
and Gettysburg Railroad Company VS..
Singleton Houck, an appeal from the
decision of Justice c. H. Eckstein, was
taken up before the court. The case is
SUIT for 500, the amount Of two
shares of stock of the railroad company,
alleged to have been subscribed for by
Mr.. Houck, who claims that when he
subscribed for the stock it was agreed
that he was to pay for it with cross ties,
and if he could not pay for them in that
way he was to be exempted from paying
for the shares. The court rendered a
verdict for the railroad company for SIoo,
with costs above and below. Coblentz.
Waters and Brown. and Stoner and
Weinberg represented the railroad COM
pany, and Reno S. Harp represented Mr..
Houck.
The case of William M. Haueh VS..
Franklin Z. Michael, a suit for s. 900 for
alleged SANDER, was taken up before a
jury. The parties reside at Mount
Pleasant, and the-plaintiff alleges that
he had engaged his service to Lewis
Lochner but lost it because of remark
alleged to have been made by the de-
PENDANT When on the witness stand,
Mr.. Lochner denied that the defendant
made the alleged remark, whereupon
counsel for the plaintiff entered a non
pros. Reno S. Harp and Stoner and
Weinberg represented the plaintiff, and
Coblentz, Waters and Brown represented
the defendant.
In the case of Victor Kaplon and
| Brother, VS.. Mr.. and Mrs. Charles
| Woodcock, suit to revive a Judgment
for SIS. counsel for the plaintiff entered
| non pros H. X DeLauter and ex-
Judge Glenn H. Worthington repre-
Sented the plaintiffs, and Reno S. Harp
represented the defendant.
The case Of Willard +. Rockwell, by
| Jacob r Rockwell, his .lther and next
friend VS.. DrS. Levin T. West and
| Henry S. Hedges. was taken up before
Jury The case is a suit for $50 900
damages.
Rockwell was hostler in the employ
of the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad at
the Brunswick wards, and during De-
cember, 1908, while manipulating the
reverse bar of an engine, it caught his
| right foot fracturing his ankle He was
taken to the hospital and was attended
by the defendants. The plaintiff alleges
that because of their negligence and
careless treatment his leg became dis
eased, and he was taken to hospital in
Baltimore, where the leg was ampu-
| tated. The evidence was concluded
on Wednesday. At the conclusion of
the testimony of the plaintiff, counsel for
the defendants offered PRAYER to take
the case from the jury, upon the ground
| that there was not sufficient evidence
to give the case to the Jury.
which was granted by the court Coun-
sci for the defendants thereupon entered
non pros P f. Pampel and Stoner
and Weinberg represented the plaintiff
and John s. Newman represented the
defendants.
The case of Albert T. Campbell, col
ored, VS.. Dr. Levin T. West, was taken
up before the jury. The case is suit
for $40, 600 damages The plaintiff met
with an accident at Brunswick in Octo-
Der, 1905. and had his foot broken. He
was attended by the defendant, who
failed to inform him of the extent OF his
injuries. The jury rendered verdict
for the defendant.