The Barre daily times. (Barre, Vt.) 1897-1959, 1913-12-15
IMPORTANT NEGLIGENCE SUIT
Was Won by Workman Against Fair
banks Company.

st. Johnsbury, Dec I5.--Caledonia
county court took a recess Saturday
night until Dec. 20 to make it possible
for Judge Frank L. Fish to 90 to Rut-
land to preside at a murder trial. This
matter was understood when Judge Fish
was assigned to this territory.
Already there have been six Jury trials
here and half of them of considerable
Importance. Possibly the most impor-
tant case tried was the negligence case
of Albert Carleton vs.. +. & T. Fairbanks
& Co., for alleged lack of instruction and
ill-equipment in the defendant com
pany's factory last year. Young Carle-
ton, who is 20 years of age, received in
juries to his hand upon a saw to the
extent that his hand is greatly disfig-
ured and his fingers stiff and rigidly
half-clenched. The jury found that the
defendant company was negligent in not
providing the plaintiff boy with suitable
instructions as to the saw and also that
the equipment was inadequate to the
normal needs of the case in doing its
duty TO its workmen. The jury awarded
a verdict to young Carleton of 81 800
damages and costs. The case win prob
ably 90 to the supreme court on excep-
tions.
The case of Liquid Carbonc company
vs.. the st. Johnsbury Fruit company
was fought out to the finish and may yet
go to the supreme court in spite of the
fact that only S25 was involved. This
was the sum said to be due on the sale
of fixtures ON a soda fountain. The case
took two days and resulted in verdict
for the defendant company to recover
its costs.
The case of Walker & Brook of Barnet
VS.. the d. w. Ranlet company of Bos-
ton and trustee was fought out against
the principal defendant without the de-
fendant being present, and damages
were assessed by the jury in the sum
of $1,000 because of the failure of the
Ranlet company to deliver certain
shipment OF grain when contracted for.
One verdict has been ordered; to wit,
in the case of George Gray VS.. G. H.
Williams and others. Verdict was or
dered for the defendant to recover his
costs. Suit was brought on a note given
in payment for a pair of horses. The
court held that the note was materially
altered since it was signed and therefore
the plaintiff could nto recover.
In the case of Alexander Blair of Bar
net VS.. the Estate of Alexander Blair. sr.,
the case was settled before it was con-
cluded by the jury. Suit was brought
to recover for labor of the younger Blair
at the home of Blair, the elder, after
the young man became of age. The
suit was really brought when, after the
elder Blair's death, it was discovered
that the young man was not the son
of his supposed father and neither le-
gally adopted so that he could inherit
as a son, as he expected he never know
ing that he was not the elder Blair's
real son.
The last case tried was the case of
Emmaretta Drown VS.. ArelIus OdelCrk
for the care and support of Mr.. Ode
kinks daughter at the home of his sis
ter, Mrs. Drown. The defense was that
Mr.. 0dekirk made covenant with his
sister and that said care was included
therein, thereby making full satisfaction
The jury gave a verdict for the plaintiff,
however, in the sum of $7l760 damages
and costs.
A long term with several important
trials remains for the next session and
court will last well into January with
out doubt.