Norwich bulletin., 1913-01-14
GIVEN TILL. JANUARY 27
 TO TAKE. STRUCTURE DOWN.
Judge Waller lssuess Order in Hedge Avenue Case-Eenoe. or Grape Arbor?

The court of common pleas came in here on Monday. afternoon az. Z o'clock. Judge Charles B. Waller ou the bench. Assignments were made and motions heard.
 The case of Emma Shanley vs, An- nte NJ Dyer, owners of adjoining property on Hedge avenue. in. East Norwich. was before the court on, the motion of William H. Shields attorney for Mrs Shanley, proposing a form of Judgment in the case in accordance with Judge Walters decision for the plaintiff made on January 9th. The plaintiff and the defendant are owners and occupants o1 cottage houses stard- 1911. near the dividing line of the lots, and opposite the kitchen and cellar windows of the Shanley. house. Mrs Dyer had erected solid board Sfruc- ture, upwards of twelve feel high and about forty feet long, cutting off the air, light and sun from the Shanley house. Mrs Shanley brought suit against Mrs, Dyer. claiming that the structure had been erected through malice and with inten- to depreciate the value of the Shanley house. Mrs. Dyer claimed that the structure had been erected by her for the purpose of supporting a grapevine. which was fastened to it after the suit was brought Judge Waller decided that the fence was an uasightiy structure, that il obstrueted light and air and sunshine to the ShanIey house, depre- ciated the value of the Shanley prop erty. and was erected intentionally for that purpose.
 Judge Waller, in the motion of Mrs. Shal2Icy's lawyer signed 8 mandatory injunction commanding Mrs. Dyer un- der a penalty or $500 to take down the structure oza or before the 27th day Of January this year. Donald !. Perkins, counsel for Mrs. Dyefs asked Judge Waller to modify the injunction my fixing 8 height at which the structure might be allowed to remain and so save Mrs Dyes the trouble and expense of taking the whole structure down Lawyer Shields opposed the naodifca- tion of the injunction asked and Judge Waller declined to change the form of Injunction as already signed.
 Judge Waller, however, said that if the defendant cared to be heard far ther on the matter he would hear her and the other party with witnesses at any time before Jannary 27tf>
 More than the usual interest at taches to the case from the fact that the structure mentioned in the suit was erected entirely on the Dyer prop erty, not on the dividing line. so that the suit was brought under section HOT of general statutes of the state of Connecticut, req ding as follows.
 s*An action may be maintained by the proprietor of any land against the owner or lessee of land adjacent who shall nlaEciOuSiy erect any structure thereon with intent to annoy or injure the plaintiff in his use or disposition of his land"
 Assignments Made.
 The following assignments were made, all for court sessions to be held in this city:
 Jan, 25-Garceau vs. Crockett
 Jan. 2S-Wood Bros vs. Avery; Ma roney vs Italian socety.
 Jan. 2S-Peck ys. Abraham.
 Feb. 3-Pratt vs- Hawthorne.
 Feb. 10-Hathaway Ys- Stevens.
 In Fox and others. executors, vs. Lutic Maynard and others. judgment of foreclosure on a judgment lien was granted
 Tn Michael Levine vs. John Kessler special bail of $500 was ordered in two weeks
 Bonds of s75 were ordered in four weeks in E,lihu Street Ys. Lyman Les ter, and an answer in one week was ordered in Alexander J. Connor vs. Central Vermont Rai1road company particulars was given in H. B. Norton vS. Charles Denison and wife
 Answer in two wekS was ordered in Bowser vs. Klein, and a more specific statement in two weeks was ordered in Mary C. Ad1es vS. A. Parker Smith, 
 A demurrer was argued in Leonard Harris vs. Dr. William Witter, and the judge took the papers.
 The judge took the papers in ThoInp- son Co. vs- Royal Linen Mills Co.,. a plea in abatement
 Answer or other pieadings was or 1ered in two weeks iE the three cases of John Kessler vs. Mike Levine, John kessler vs Allen G. Wickwire and \ Jar. z EixNLy rzyir