Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1914-03-17
CURR|DEN LOSES FIGHT
TO RECOVER $4,000
Court Rules in Case Involving Rela-
lions of Promoter and
Investor.
Supreme Tribunal Also Asked to Ap-
ply Dog Law to Auto
Owners.

The Supreme Court Of the United States
has handed down an opinion in the case
Of Samuel W. Curriden against Frank L.
Middleton, affirming the Judgment OF the
Court of Appeals of the District Of CO.
lumbia in the suit wherein Curriden
sought to recover the sum of 1000. with
interest for ten years. The ruling is for
the defendant
The suit was Of great local interest
not only because OF the parties involved
and the large amount Of the claim. but
also because Of the determination by the
Supreme Court of the United States OF
the exact legal relations existing between
a promoter and one who invests in q cor
poration at his instance.
The original bill in the case was filed
by Curriden seeking recovery from Mid
dleton, who at that time was an officer
and stockholder in the American Auto
matte Disinfecting Company. on the
ground that the investment made by Cur
riden followed alleged misrepresentation
made to him by the defendant BIS to the
value Of the patents owned and con-
trolled by the company.
Defendants Position.
The defendant, in denying these aver
ments, took the position that the plain.
hff was not entitled to relief, even in the
showing made in his bill. for the reason
that hi remedy. II any. was an action at
law for damages instead of suit In
equity. and. secondly. that on the plain
tin's own showing made in the bill he
had an equal opportunity with the de-
PENDANT of ascertaining the value Of the
stock purchased by him in the company.
The original bill in the case was dis
missed by Justice Stafford Of the Su-
preme Court Of the District of Column
bia. before whom the case was originally
heard. and the decree entered by him
was affirmed by the Court OF Appeals
of the District Of Columbia, whose judg-
ment was affirmed In the opinion hand
ed down by the Supreme Court Of the
United States
Former Senator William E. Chandler,
Judge William L. Chambers and l. A.
Bailey appeared for Curriden. and At
torney E. Hilton jackson appeared for
the defendant.
Dog Law for Autoists.
The Supreme Court Of the United
States has been asked to apply to au-
tomobile operators and owners the rule
Of law which is applied to the owners
of dogs that inflict injuries or damages
on others. The case was one in which
the constitutionality OF a Michigan
state law has been attacked. The law
in question provides that automobile
owners shall be financially responsible
for injuries inflicted by the machines
they are operating. The Metzger Mo-
tor Car Company brought the case to
the Supreme Court, the company hav-
ing been sued and judgment having
been rendered against 1t In favor of
two men and a boy who were injured
by tester employed by the company,
who. 1t was said. was "Joy riding" at
illegal speed in one OF the companys
cars.
That q sprinkler plant installed in a
manufacturing establishment, even II
not paid for. becomes a part OF the
"after-acquired property" unless the
contract Is recorded, was the decision
Of the Supreme Court yesterday In q
suit involving title to a sprinkler plant
Installed by George H. Holt & Co. In
the Williamsburg knitting mills at
Williamsburg. Va. When the concern
became bankrupt and the property waa
taken under foreclosure the makers OF
the sprinkling plant endeavored to re-
move the device. The holder of the
mortgage refused to surrender it. and
when the case reached the fourth
United States circuit court OF appeals
that tribunal held in favor of the Holt
company. The decision of the Supreme
Court reverses the findings of the lower
court.