Catoctin clarion. [volume] (Mechanicstown, Md.) 1871-1940, 1912-01-11
IS SUING ON NOTES.
Senator Samuel Emmert, OF
Washington County, in Court.

Washington County, in Court.
Friday afternoon the case of Senator
Samuel Emmert, of Washington county,
against S. Elmer Ramsburg, of Utica,
was taken up before the court. The suit
is for $l60, being the amount OF money
Mr.. Ramsburg agreed, to pay toward the
purchase of horse, which was gotten
from George O. Slime. After securing
the note, Mr. Slime sold it to Senator
Emmert, who now seeks to collect it.
The note given by Mr.. Ramsburg is
dated February 81, 1911, and was for
$3.50, payable in six months, with inter-
est at six per cent. This note contained
clause, providing the holder might en-
ter confessed judgment in a court OF
record.
When the note was not paid Senator
Emmert sought to recover the face OF
the note and entered suit, to which de-
murrer was filed, and after this attor-
neys for Emmert entered confessed
Judgment, as they contended they had
power to do as set forth in the note.
Attorneys for Mr.. Ramsburg, then
moved that the judgment be stricken
out, and this question occupied the atten-
ton of the court all morning. The de-
PENDANTS based their request for striking
out the judgment on the fact that when
Ramsburg sigLed the note the instrument
was sealed one, and in the note in court
the seal had been stricken out. The court
held that the note had been materially
altered, aid ordered the judgment strick.,
en- out, and the case goes over until
February. Stoner and Weinberg repre-
sented Ramsburg. Brown and Matthias
appeared for Senator Senator Emmert.
Senator Emmert has another case in
court against John M. Smith and wife,
of Woodsboro, which is somewhat the
same as in the Ramsburg case. The suit
is for 81, 100 on two notes secured by
Slime for the sale of horse, and Slime
sold them to Senator Emmert. Emmert
brought suit in equity setting forth the
Indebtedness, and alleging that Smith
had transferred all his property to his
wife for the purpose of evading payment
of the notes. He asked that the deed be
Set aside and that Smith and wife be
prevented from disposing of any of the
property.
Smith and wife then came into court,
denying the indebtedness and asked that
issues be framed and the case tried on
it's merits. After filing this, attorneys
for Emmert entered confessed judgments
as in the Ramsburg case. The same at
torneys appear in this case, and the same
question of seals is at issue. The Court
heard testimony Saturday morning and
the case held until the February term.
The case of jonas V. Summers and
wife against Greenberry Putnam and
wife, which had been in court for two
days was given the jury Friday night
The suit was for $500, the amount named
in an agreement to be paid by either of
the parties to the agreement, in case
either failed to fulfil his part of the
agreement which dealt with the sale of a
farm to Summers by Putnam for Sis, 900.
The jury after being out a short time
rendered verdict in favor of Summers.
giving him $500, the full amount asked.
Stoner and Weinberg, attorneys for
Mr.. Putnam, Saturday morning filed
motion for new trial, alleging the ver-
dict was against the evidence and con-
trary to law, and also upon the grounds
of newly discovered evidence. Brown
and Matthias represented Summers.