Bonners Ferry herald. [volume] (Bonners Ferry, Idaho) 1904-current, 1916-03-24
CARRATT WINS
DAMAGE SUIT
Jury Brings Verdict for the Defendan.
In the Case of Lindsey Against
CARAT This Week
THE EVIDENCE WAS SENSATIONAL
Much Testimony Taken and Many
Witnesses Examined

The sensational $4,000 damage suit
for personal injuries brought by
Mrs. Ella Lindsey and 1. w. Lind
sey, her husband, against State Rep
resentative H. B. Carratt ended late
Wednesday afternoon when the jury,
after two hours elaboration, brought
in verdict for the defendant.
The action was brought by Mrs.
Lindsey some months ago to re-
cover actual and punitive damages
against the defendant, for injuries
which she claimed to have sustained
by reason of being struck by the de-
PENDANT in a fight in June, 1915.
She claimed that Mr.. Carratt, with
out any provocation, struck her twice,
breaking off one of her teeth, black
ening one eye, and inficting in
juries to her nervous system from
which she has never fully recovered,
and which have confined her to her
bed for considerable time.
Mr.. CARAT alleged, in his an
swer, that he did not strike Mrs.
Lindsey, but that she attacked him
when he went upon property be-
longing to the Hooker estate, of
which he was administrator, and
which the Lindsey family was oc-
cupying, and that in defending him
self from her attack, he accident
ally struck her once.
Mrs. Lindsey and her sister, Mrs.
Dora Price, both testified as to the
facts concerning the alteration, and
they called a number of other wit
nesses to tell the jury what Mrs.
Lindsey's condition was Immediately
after the encounter, and for several
days after that. Mr. and Mrs. Car
raft and David Mcguire testified as
to their view of the fight, their testi-
mony agreeing with that of the
plaintiff, in the main, but differing
as to who struck the first blow or
how many blows were struck. Mrs.
Lindsey, on cross examination, ad-
mitted that if she struck Carratt
at all, she struck the first blow, but
did not think that she hit him at all.
Drs. McKinnon and Stackhouse OF
Standpoint, and DR.. E. E. Fry of
this city were all called as experts
They made an examination of the
plaintiff, and differed greatly as to
her present condition. DR.. Stack
house claimed that she was appar-
emily in good health and that she
seemed to be normal in nearly every
way. DR.. McKinnon thought that
he detected traces of a heart af-
lection but was not positive. DR.
Fry's testimony was largely directed
toward establishing the plaintiffs in
iuries as they appeared Immediately
raft, and the history" of the case
Considerable time was taken up with
an effort to determine whether, il
the plaintiffs nerves are in baC
shape, the result is that of being
struck last June or is the natura
sequence of germs which appeared
to have been in her system for sew
eral years, and on, this point, tn,
doctors fatty disagreed.
Following this testimony, a number
of neighbors of both parties wer'
called by Mr.. Carratt's attorneys
and were asked to state what the,
considered the plaintiffs reputation
for peace and quietness in tn
neighborhood. They stated, in sub
stance, that, in their opinion, it wa
not good. On cross examination b.
the plaintiffs attorney, it was devel
oped that this opinion was largel
the result of neighborhood talk, al
though some specific instances wer
cited by one witness in which tn
plaintiff had attacked a school teach
er at a board meeting some month
ago.
In rebuttal, Gilmer Lindsey an
Jason Price, two boys about twelv
years of age, were brought on tn
stand to testify as to the fact c
their coming to the field where tn
alteration in question took plac'
some hours prior to the trouble
They admitted that they came to th
field with shotgun, which the
stated was not loaded, but whic
they carried ito scare Mr.. CARAT
1t developed that the defendant ha
asked them if they were going
shoot, and then took the gun ava
from them, being led to believe TIL