Pine Bluff daily graphic. (Pine Bluff, Ark.) 1893-1942, 1916-05-23
TWO JUDGMENTS
IN R. R. CASES
ARE SUSTAINED
Former Employees of Rail
roads Will Collect Aggre-
gate of $4,000.

Little Rock, May 22-IWO JuOe-
ments against railroads in personal
injury cases were affirmed today by
the supreme court On was that Of
William Ingram against the Iron
Mountain railroad and the other was
that of Eugene Henley, a. 11-year-old
boy, against the Prescott & North
western Railway company. Ingram
got Judgment of $4,000, and the
Henley boy was awarded $4,000. 'The
Ingram case will be appealed to the
United States supreme court, attor-
neys for the railroad said
The Ingram suit was based on the
federal employers liability act. 1t
first was tried in independence coun-
ty. and was remanded on an appeal
to the supreme court. The suit ruled
on Monday originated in Jackson
county. Ingram was an employe OF
the railroad company and wss per-
manently injured, it was alleged,
while working on the company's right
of way.
Young Henley was a water boy"
and was thrown from and run over
by handcar operated by other en-
ployes of the railroad. He was IL
years old at the time of the accident.
1t was contended that one wheel of
the hapdcar was in faulty condition,
and that it caused the handcar to
lucrh and throw the lad in front of
the car wheels. The suit was appeal
ed from Pike county.
Occupation Tax Case Goes Over.
When the case of Charles Laprairie
against the city of Hot Springs, at
lacking the validity Of an Occupation
tax ordinance, enacted by the city
council of Hot Springs, YVES called
for submission in the supreme court
today, motion asking that the ap-
peal be dismissed for failure to prop
erly prepare the transcript was filed.
The court probably will rule on the
motion next week.
Because several cities in Arkansas
have enacted similar revenue meas
ures to replace the revenue lost
through enactment of the statewide
prohibition law, the case is of consld-
cradle Importance. Little Rock is
one of the cities that has enacted a
similar measure.
Decisions Rendered.
The following opinions were deliv-
cred in the supreme court today:
BY Chief Justice McCulloch:
J. F. Moore VS.. H. K. Wade. from
Washington circuit court; affirmed.
Lloyd G. Merritt VS. Fred C. Kubler.
from Garland chancery court; affirm
ed.
C. V. Beloate VS.. w. E. Beloate.
from Clay chancery court; reversed
and remanded on appeal; affirmed on
cross-appeal.
BY Justice Wood:
The Murray company against John
M. Satterfield. from Yell circuit
court; affirmed.
Prescott & Northwestern Railway
company VS.. Eugene Henley, from
Pike circuit court; affirmed
George T. Rlakemore VS.. Geo. w.
Emondson. from Prairie chancery
court; affirmed.
BY Justice Hart:
w. D. Reeves Lumber company VS..
Jno. NJ. Davis, from Phillips circuit
court; reversed and remanded.
Mrs. S. l.. Driver VS.. Philip LAGER,
from Mississippi chancery court: re-
versed and remanded with directions.
J. C. Long, administrator, VS.. Re-
ceivers st. Louis & San Francisco
Railroad company, from Lawrence
circuit court; affirmed.
BY Justice Kirby:
]. D. Hill VS.. Emmett Morris ct al,
from Pulaski chancery court; revers
ed and remanded with directions.
A. l.. Clark Lumber company VS..
Jack Hurst. from Pike circuit court !;
affirmed
BY Justice Smith:
Mrs. Lena High VS.. ]. B. Reed, from
Lonoke circuit court; reversed and
remandcd.
r. G. Davies VS.. c. l. Johnson, from
Garland chancery court; affirmed
Justice Hart dissents.
st. Louis, Iron Mountain and South
ern Railway company VS.. William In