South Bend news-times. (South Bend, Ind.) 1913-1938, 1915-06-10
SHIVELY FAVORED
BY COURT RULING
Motion to Dismiss is Upheld BY
Judge Funk-AttorneyS For
Long Mye, Plaintiff in Case,
Rest.

A verdict in favor Of Dudley Shive-
" was ordered by Judge Funk in the
circuit court wednesday afternoon
upon motion OF counsel for Shively.
This action was taken as soon as the
plaintiff rested In the case OF Long
Mye against the Independent and
10 cent store and Shively. The suit
is 10 recover s7.O65.35 for damages
sustained when the buildings at 112-
ia S. Michigan st. collapsed on Jan.
3, 1914 Motion was also made We'd
nesday afternoon by counsel for the
and 10 cent store 10 have a verdict
returned I'm favor OF that defendant.
and after lengthy arguments this mo-
tion was taken under Amusement by
the court until Thursday morning.
Testimony for the plaintin had been
heard since last Friday morning.
Long Mye was the last witness to be
placed on the stand and the hearing
OF his testimony consumed much time
for the reason that there was con-
siderable difficulty in securing an in
terpreter TO translate for him. The
plaintiff conducted chop suey res
taurant on the second floor at No. 112
when the catastrophe occurred. lie
alleges that he lost personal property
TO the value OF S4,565.35, and also "A
trade which made the remaining
three years OF his lease worth $4,000.
First Case Important.
This suit is the first of eight suits
which were brought IS a result of the
collapse OF the buildings and it is of
much Importance for the reason that
IL is expected to settle through il the
question as to who was TO blame for
the accident. Shively was made a
party 20 the defense for the reason
that after leasing the building at No.
ia. belonging TO the Shively estate.
10 the and 10 cent store he leased
the second floor Of the HOrner build
ing, at No. 112, from the and 10
cent store and later sub-leased that
floor to Long Mye for his Chinese
restaurant.
The contention Of the plaintiff in
the present case is that the buildings
collapsed "a the result Of alterations
being made TO the buildings for the
5 and 10 cent store, which occupied
the Easements and ground floors. The
alterations were being made for the
purpose of throwing these sections on
the buildings into one. The plaintiff
holds that the work of alteration was
negllgently done by the contractor.
William Solarek. and that the and
10 cent store was responsible for the
work done by the contractor. The
plaintiff attaches no blame on w. w.
Schneider. the architect who planned
the alterations
It is expected that the defense will
be made with the view Of proving
that the 5 and 10 cent store retained
no responsibility in the work of alter
alton but that the entire responsible
ity was assumed by the contractor.
II IS not conceded 10y the defense that
the architect was blameless.
Withdraws Additional Paragraph.
Previous to the resting of the plain
tiff's case Wednesday afternoon the
additional paragraph of complaint,
filed Tuesday. was withdrawn. IN this
complaint allegations were made con
corning the removal of rocks and
boulders from the basement of the
buildings. which operations it was
said. had not been learned of until
Monday. Evidence. however. de-
veloped the fact that the foundatio on
of the buildings was OF brick and that
there were no rocks or bOulders in
the basement the removal of which
might have weakened the foundation
The plaintiff is represented by
Howell. Jones q Devine and the de-
PENDANT by Osborne, McVey q Os-
borne OF LapOrte, and Hubbard &
Hubhard of this Citx