Putnam patriot. [volume] (Putnam, Conn.) 1872-1962, 1915-09-24
SUPERIOR COURT

\ short calendar session ana assign
ment OF eases was held at Putnam,
Friday morning, Judge James H..
Weeb presiding. ldouons were heard
and assignments made for two weeks
The uneonteseed divorce of Carrie +.
Tripp of kilhngly vs. Charles II.
Trip of Eastford was heard and the
petition granted. The couple were
married ia Putnam, November 9th
1897 According To the petitioner her
husband had been treating her cruelty
for the past 10 yeurs, striking her and
using abusive language. On January
LIST, last he hit her.ove the head with
bag of shavings and she left him
Her father and son eorroberated her
testimony.
Two criminal cases were disposed of.
Alexander Brostoek of Jewett City
plead guilty to the illegal sale of
liquor. He attempted to act as agent
to procure liquor for a party in no.
license town and the order was not
made out correctly. He plead guilty
and was fined $50 and costs.
Lewis Turner, Il, was brought to
court by Lawyer a. q. Bill OF Dan
ielson in whose charge he had been as
probation officer. The young man
was arrested on charge of the larceny
OF $3.50 at Dayville. Lawyer Bill told
the court that he had not been obser-
wing the terms of his probation as he
should After hearing a statement
from She accused the court decided to
give him further chance. Deputy
Sheriff Ayers OF Dayville is TO keep
track of the young man and report his
behavior to Lawyer Bill. suspend
ed sentence to the state reformatory is
banging over Turner.
The case of Joseph Kelley VS. the
Town of Eastford was tried to jury
in the Superior court in Putnam
Wednesday. The plaintiff claimed
that the town was negligent in that a
road roller was left standing in the
highway near bridge in Phoenix
VILE in the town of Eastford and that
horse of a man with whom the
plaintiff was riding was frightened
thereby and that he was thrown out
against wire fence and that the loss
of an ear and other injuries resulted.
Damages of $1,000 WIS claimed, on
| cross examination the driver of the
horse admitted that he passed the
roller in the morning and that his
horse became frightened and that he
got out and led it by the obstruction.
He also stated that on his return he
might have gone by different route
and that he took chance thinking
that the horse on the homeward trip
would pass the roller without diff
Guilty. The plaintiff rested just be-
fore the noon recess and the defend
ants counsel moved for a non suit and
the arguments on the motion lasted
until four O'Clock. II was claimed by
the defendant that the plaintiff had
not made out prima lacia case. That
he knew of the danger and took a
Il
chance and that it WAS not the duty
of she town of Eastford to remove the
roller as the troad was a state trunk
line and wholly under the control of
| the state. In granting the non suit
the court stated that it was strongly
impressed at the close of the plaintiffs
case that plaintiff had failed in the
essential element, that plaintiff was
in the exercise of due care. Judge
| Webb said that it seemed clear that
| the driver Of the horse had rushed into
danger with his eyes open TO the con-
sequence as his knowledge of the situa-
tion in the morning was powerful
| waning" In regard to the other
point claimed by the defendants
counsel, that the road was a trunk
| line and under the supervision OF the
state the plaintiff failed to allege and
show that the ,town was bound to
keep it in repair. The motion was
granted