Evening journal., 1913-10-06
LEGAL
FIGHT AGAINST
JURY AWARDS
Counsel For Owners Affected
by Joint Building CORdem-
nation Attack the Find
ingS
MORE ARGUMENT TO
Be HEARD LATER

I Chief Justice Pennewill and Judge
Woolley sat in Superior Court today to
hear argument on the motion to quash
the return of the sherif's jury in the
matter OF the site for the Joint county
and city building. William S Hilles
appeared for the com ission; Robert Fl
Richards and John +. Neary Tor the
owners. and Reuben satterthwaite for
Sheriff Burris
Mr.. Hilles filed motion TO discuss
the motion to quash the return OF the
commission in the cases OF John Good
win and Dr. Samuel g. Ebert.
Sheriff Burris testified in answer q
Mr.. Richards, that the jury was drawn
in the sherifi's Office and had been duly
sworn. He Identified the notices served
on the attorneys in the case
The sheriff said each member of tho
Jury was sworn in each case The sher
if also said that Mr. Richards and DR.
Ebert we're present az the hearing il
the courthouse The same applied q
Nh Neary and his client and no obiec
tion WIS made al that time to an,
member of the Jury. The sheriff sal,
he did net know that Frank H. Thomas
had been served with notice TO appeal
as Juror He did not know Mr.
Thomas had been drawn as a juror O
excused as such
Da. Samuel G.. Ebert said he was
present nhis property on the morni
ing of July Il. when the jury ap
peare6 here. The doctor said the
jury was not draw or sworn on his
premises.
Charles C. Guyer said he took the
testimony before the jury. He saiC
he had not been sworn as
a stenographer at that time and wal
called by Mr.. Satterthwaite over th'
telephone. The testimony was deliv
, cred to Mr. Hilles' office. The wit
nesses testified under oath today.
Mr. Satterthwaite. counsel foi
Sheriff Burris. testified that a juro
gave him a COPY of the testimony af
ter the return had been made to thu
sheriff He knew of no objection
being made TO the jury when EN-
paneled. No testimony was takei
, geographically until the second de,
of the examination. Mr.. Phillips,
, juror. asked for a stenographer an
iMr. Guyer was engaged Wtnes
said that after taking the testimon
the Jury took a recess for q few day
, to hear other witnesses. CounsC
agreed 10 assist the jury to get furth
er testimony From the time Of tai
ing the last testimony the jury did NJ
separate Counsel for the appellant
we're not present when the jury wa
, sworn. Mr.. Satterthwaite said Wi
liam C. Phillips. one Of the jury, n
called that he was affirmed in all n
cases, viewed the properties an
heard the testimony.
Mr.. Richards objected TO the vii
ness disclosing any Of the delibers
p. tions of the jury.
Mr.. Hilles said he did not believ
9 the jury was bound by the rules OF
, trial jury.
u Mr.. Phillips said he remembers
j. that counsel agreed TO take furthe
7 testimony. The verdict was reache
at two sessions of The jury. Afte
hearing the arguments Mr.. Phillip
z said he could not remember If an
date for the next meeting has bee
e selected.
Upon being called, Sheriff Burr
= testified that the jury always sepi
y rated with his approval.
e Mr.. Hilles offered in evidence III
writs OF ad quod da.1num and NJ
le Richards objected, holding that the
A are not part OF he recoi BEL. Mr. Hille
said the writs were rot addressed
l. the Superior Court, but to JudG
D. Woolley, who is not resident Judge.
He submitted III the petition
are not part of the r~cords. The ol
lection was sustained.
Mr.. Richards offered in eviden'
N an objection filed by him to the jul
VI taking testimony the last day on a
count of having separated.
ID Reuben Satterthwaite was recall
,r and testified that on the second dl
,e the jury was in its box after tho arg
- ment Some one said the jury ask
- for more testimony. Mr.. Hilles sa
= the Jury could go out and 8
testimony or information Mr.. Ric
ards told them they conld not 80 o
IT individually and get the infoTmati
and cousel then agreed to willing
get the testimony. After that the
81 was 10 testimony taken except tn
~, ny of Mr.. Scott
ne Mr.. Hilles had stated to the in
ne he wanted the witnesses to be prese
d in open court. Notices signed by \
NJ Satterthwaite TO Mr.. Richards and
r. Neary notifying them of the last 81
p sion of the sheriff's jury we're offer
ay In evidence.
re- Mr.. Hnles then commenced
IT. argument on the motion to dism
iss the motion to quash the writ Of
IT. auod damnun. Mr.. Richards follow
ia Mr.. Richards said that it cannot
ms contcnded that the application to
en prothonotary is not in line IS iud e
by one. He said the statutes are el'
er- about the sheriff making return.
iu- contended such a return is required a
Ill that the documents cannot be Ieeor'
nd until the return of the freeholders
or confirmed. or the return of the writ
ad quad damno.
Court then took recess.
la MnTHEQ ann SISTER