Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1911-04-20
AUTOMOBILE CASE ENDED
Jury Found for Defendant to Re
cover His Costs.
One Diyorce Granted In County Court
and Hearings in Two Others Post
poned because of New
Inv.

When Chttcnden county court went IN
Friday morning the panel of Jurors wa
seated and the serenity on each man.
face showed that Il conclusion had been
reached in the case of Elias Lyman ".
G. W. James. As has been stated. the ac-
ton was to recover damages for the al
legged wrongful taking and detention of an
automobile by the defendant. a deputy
sheriff Of Franklin county. Tho machine
vas In the possession of William II. Hin,
and was taken on a debt of his, but was
claimed by the plaintiff. to whom it had
been sold
The verdict was for the defendant to
recover his costs. The claim of defend
ant was that there had not been such
a change of possession Of the machine
from hin to Lyman as to have been a
good sale as against creditors of ffill,
though perfectly good as between Hin
and l. man. The plaintiffs attorney, Max
l.. Powell, has a large number Of eXcep-
lions good bad and Indifferent, but he
feels sure of having a sufficient number
of the first class to get the case back for
another trial
SET BACK IN DIVORCE CASES.
The jurors in the case were excused
Until Tuesday morning. The court then
united for business, and a hustle was
heard outside the door as If some one was
coming with a rush. 1t was divorce
party headed BY Lawyer Hopkins, Sara
f. Gaines vs.. George w. Gaines. The
court welcomed the party and got busy,
making noise like court hearing a
divorce case But the noise soon stopped.
! The case ran foul of a legislative snag.
bearing the date 1910 The last bunch of
wisdom and virtue" provided that no di-
! vorce case should be heard at the first
| term where the notice TO the petitionee
was by publication In newspaper, which
might or might not have been seen by
! the petitioneo. So the divorce party re-
+ tired again. and again there was n lull.
! Then, 10. another hustle and rush out
/ side tho door and in came n second
divorce party headed 10y Lawyer Ash
| land Mary G. Dougucrty vs. Frank Il.
| Lourherty. The court resumed its smile
and again got busy; the case progressed
inst three minutes. then bump, and Mr..
Ashland and his party had struck the
same snaS that had upset the first party.
The new statute as to notice in divorce
cases provides that the court may order
| the case continued and further notice
made. If deemed necessary. I, was sug-
gested by r. e Brown that in the cases
continued at this term under the new
act. the court should at this time int'-
mate whether any further notice was
considered necessary in any case so tha'
no case next term should encounter HeIaE
from that cause. Judge hutier suggest
ca there should he an arhdaNl' hIed II
such cases showing that the pctuohct
doeS not KNOW the Whereabouts Oh '"'
p'tlonee'
ONE DIVORCE GRANTED.
The divorce case Of oscar y Oden vs.
Cora Nav Oden was heard in the after
noon. Petitioner is a sergeant in TrooI
of the 10Th cavalry: last summer he Wa.
away at pine canlD. leaving his wife or
the reservation. one night In August 9
sent,no, saw man ANA woman 90 int,