Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1916-12-14
Law COURT
Androscoggin and Aroostook
Cases Argued at Wednes-
days Session - Cumber.
= land and Knox Cases
Today

Wednesdays session Of the law court
was occupied with the hearing OF An
droecoggin and Aroostook county cases
and goodly number were disposed OF.
Cumberland county cases are called Tor
this morning and Knox cases for TINS
afternoon,
The first case heard by the court during
the day was that Of Celia M. Harvey VS..
Wilton Wooden Co, an action to recover
damages sustained by the plaintiff while
ct work in the mill Of the company. At
the trial the presiding justice ordered a
non-suft and the case Is before the law
court on exceptions to that ruling. F. A.
Morey Of Lewiston argued for the plain
tiff and F. W. Hinckley Of Portland for
the defendant.
The case of Ernest U. Archibald VS..
Queen Insurance Co. was next In order.
This is an action to recover the sum Of
$3.50 for the loss by fire insurance on an
automobile destroyed by fire. The verdict
was for the plaintiff for $1507.94 and is
before the law court on a motion for a
new trial by the defendant. F. A. Morey
Of Lewiston argued for the plaintiff and
w. r. Pattangall for the defendant.
The next case argued was that of Ste
vens Mills Paper Co. in Equity VS.. Myer,
Jr, a bill in equity brought by the Ste
vens Mills Paper Co. in which the plain
tiff alleges that the defendant was the
owner of certain property acquired
through sheriff's deed on sale and execu-
ton made April s, 1915, subject to recla-
nation within one year from date, and
that the defendant by purposely absenting
n AA~A I
could not be reached prevented the pay
ment of the tender which the plaintiff was
prepared to make SO payment could not
be made until April TO- 1876 when the
amount was rendered il, gold and was
refused. The attorney for the plaintiff
was Donald D. Garcelcn of Lewiston and
Fl. W. Cakes of Auburn was counsel for
the defendant.
Next in order for hearing were nine
suits brought by weavers against the Lib
by Co., eight of the suits being to recover
wages for two weeks labor and the other
to recover wages for one weeks labor.
The weavers had left the employ Of the
company where they had worked on
double blankets at the rate Of 12a cents
per pair. All could read and write except
Ou0 anu tAcy oil udu oI6ICu OH deiOo-
ment providing for the forfeiture Of a
weeks wages in case they left without
giving a weeks notice. The case is be-
fore the law court on motion OF the
defendant F. A. Morey of Lewiston ar
gued for the plaintiffs and Newell &
Woods,de of Lewiston for the defendant
company.
The claim Of the defendant was that the
weavers had left their work because one
of the employees had been discharged;
that they had left their looms idle and
that they should ID held to the agree
ment which they had signed.
The plaintiffs claimed that they did not
read the agreement before signing it. that
after that time conditions changed by
the addition Of a night force which made
1t necessary to fix the machines in the
day time, and that the defendant COM
pnny should pay what 1t owed.
The last Androscoggin case argued was
that of Walter Reese vs. Roy w. Parker.
an action of debt brought to recover the
amount due under a Judgment rendered
in tho municipal court in Auburn. The
plea Of the defendant was that he did
not appear in person or authorize any
attorney to appear for him and that
therefore the judgment was void. The
case comes to the law court on excep-
tions. F. A. Morey Of Lewiston argued