Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1916-01-20
SUPERIOR COURT
Verdict of 5000 for the Plain
tiff in Case of West VS.. Skene
Case of Bither VS.. Pack
ard Scheduled for
Today

In the civil case Of William c. West.
aplt. Of Augusta VS. James w. Skene
Of Augusta, which was tried at We'd
nesday's session Of the superior court
the jury returned a verdict for the
plaintiff for 5000 after about an hours
deliberation. At the close Of this case
the jury was excused until this fore
noon and the case of Lottie A. Win
chenbach VS. Charles Winchenbach of
Rockland was heard by Judge Beane,
who reserved his decision in the matt
ter
Attorney E. H. Maxcy Of Gardiner
withdrew the plea Of not guilty and
entered the plea of nolo contendere in
criminal cases No. 46, State VS. Fred
Thibodeau Of Gardiner for common null
sance and No. 60. State VS. Fred Thi-
! bodeau. aplt. Of Gardiner, for illega!
possession. Thibodeau was fined 5000
and costs amounting to s25 or four
months in Jail in the first Of these
, cases and 500 and costs Of s25 or co
days in jail in the second case. in which
! ItS was PUT VII ~ oce~eAoAA VA ~AA> R~'
ment Of costs.
The last Of the civil cases. No. 16G,
| that of B. Earl Bther of Augusta VS.
Justin E. Packard Of Augusta will be
! opened this morning and at the close CT
| this case the trial of criminal cases
| will be commenced.
West, ApIt., VS.. Skene
At the. opening Of court Wednesday
morning the case Of West, aplt., VS.
Skene was opened. Samuel Titcomb
of Augusta appeared for the plaintiff
and Burleigh Martin of Augusta was
for the defendant. This case was APP
pealed from the Augusta municipal
court, where a verdict was given for
the defendant, and is an action for an
alleged breach of contract The dam
| ages claimed by the plaintiff amounted
| to SITS.
| According to the claim Of the plain
| tiff Mr.. Skene was the owner of a sec
ond-hand REQ automobile, the plaintiff
went to look at the automobile, and
| the plaintiff made a verbal trade with
| Mr. Skene for the automobile on con-
| dition that the car be put in running
order to be demonstrated. The defend
ant said that he would leave the mat
ter of putting the car in running order
| to Chester a. Bachelor Of Augusta.
The plaintiff paid down 81. for the pur-
pose of binding the bargain, to Mr.
| Bachelder, who was acting as an agent
, for Mr. Skene. The total purchase
price of the automobile was SIS. The
| plaintiff made demands for the deliv-
cry of the car and was ready to pay
the remaining 81. The automobile
| was never delivered and as the plain
| tiff had made a contract for the resale
| of the car, he has been unable to full
, fill his contract.
| The plaintiff Mr.. West testified that
he was in the wood business and that
| he first met Mr.. Skene last spring. And
| he testified that he made verbal con-
! tract with Mr.. Skene for the purchase
| of a REQ automobile provided it could
! be put in good running order, the puT-
/ chase price being SIS. He told Mr..
| Skene that he would like to have Mir.
| Bachelor demonstrate the car to him.
| Mr.. Skene said that day that the car
was in good running order. The plain
| tiff afterwards paid 81 to Mr.. Skenc
| but took no receipt for the money. Aft
| or that he spoke several times 20 Nj.
| Skene about the automobile but Mr..
| Skene directed him to Mr.. Bachelor
And when he asked Mr.. Bachelor for
| the car Mr.. Bachelor said that Mr.
Skene had not given him the lights for
| the car. The plaintiff was willing TO
nav the purchase price. Mr.. Skenc
| came one Sunday morning to demon
strate the car to Mr.. West but Mr..
West was not at home. In the after
noon of that day Mr.. Bachelor came
with the car and said that Mr.. Skene
had sent him to demonstrate the car
The lights on the car at that time were
broken Ford lights. The plaintiff had
told Mr.. Skene and Mr.. Bachelor that
! he had contracted to resell the car La
ter Mr.. Skene agreed to put the auto
| mobile in good running order.
JJpon cross-examination by Attorney
Martin the plaintiff admitted that he
had the automobile sold when he
bought it, the purchaser being Clyde
REYNOLDS of Augusta. The price agreed
| upon $3.50 Mr.. Reynolds did not event.
ually buy an automobile, but bought
horse.
Clyde Reynolds Of Augusta testified
! that he was not generally familiar with
automobiles but he knew this particu-
| lar one. He had contracted with Mr..
West to buy the car for $3.50.
Upon cross-examination by Attorney
Martin, Mr.. Reynolds testified that he
made the bargain for $3.50 for the car
! without seeing it but knew the car
| when Mr.. Cyr had owned it.
pefendant's Claim
The defendant denied that there was
any contract. Mr.. Skene never had any
| dealings either directly or indirectly
| with Mr.. West. Mr.. Bachelor came to
Mr.. Skene and wanted to buy the auto
mobile. stating that he would give
SIS for it. Mr.. Skene sold him the car
| and later Mr.. Bachelor paid down 81
| for it. Later Mr.. West came to Mr..
/ Skene and wanted to buy the car but
Mr.. Skene said he had already sold the
car to Mr.. Bachelor and couldn't sell
him the car. The defendant was lat
er notified that there was an action
against him. -
James w. Skene of Augusta, the de-
fendant. testified that last spring he
owned q. REQ car, which he sold to Mr..
Bachelor for SIS. Mr.. Bachelor paid
down, "a and said OBSERVATION-DISCLOSURES