New Ulm review. (New Ulm, Brown County, Minn.) 1892-1961, 1916-05-10
MAY COURT TERM
OPENS NEXT WEEK
ONLY SMALL LIST OF CASES
SLATED FOR DISPOSAL BY
JURIES.
INSPECTION OF COURT HOUSE
ABOUT ONLY DUTY OF
GRAND JURY.

District court for Brown County con-
venes next Monday morning, May Is,
for the spring term, but the prospects
are that the session will be one of the
shortest on record, as there are only
twelve civil cases scheduled for trial and
even of this number some may be put
over for another term.
AS far as is known there will be but
little work for the grand jury outside of
the usual inspection of the court house
and other county buildings. No cases
have been sent up to the district court
from justice courts for examination.
There is persistent rumor to the effect
that the grand jury will make an in
vestigation of the Postel case, and the
county attorney probably will open it
up if demand is made for an investigation
or if he feels that the circumstances
Justify an investigation.
The twelve cases set for trial are as
\ follows:
ASN. C. Hoffman, against S. A. Wool
drick, continued from last term. This
case was tried year ago, but the jury
disagreed. 1t is wage dispute.
George Guggisberg against William H.
Boettger. This is a suit for damages
alleged to have been incurred by the
plaintiff through the purchase of stock
upon the alleged representations of the
defendant. Plaintiff claims the defen-
dant recommended to him and other
farmers the purchase of stock in Irvine
manufacturing plant and that the stock
VAS not worth what it had been repre-
seited. 1t is understood that a number
of other actions against the same de-
PENDANT are awaiting the outcome of this
case, as the Irvine company disposed of
considerable stock under the same cir
cumstances This case is liable to be
put over for another term.
Hattie VS.. Walter William L. Walter;
divorce case, continued from last term.
August A. Petrich vs.. George Foster,
continued from last session and involving
ID land transaction.
State Bank of New Ulm VS.. Mime
sofa Flint Rock Co., continued from last
term and probably will again be con-
tinued.
Edward F. Berkner VS.. julius Kruger,
continued from last term; involves dis
pute over land transaction.
Albert Hesse VS.. Chicago & North
western Railway Co., also continued
from last term. Plaintiff alleges that he
was put off from train of the North
western company at Mankato during
1915 and is now seeking. to recover
damages This case also has been pend
ing in the district court since last fall. ,
State of Minnesota VS.. Alex Deinken.
The defendant in this action is at present
serving time in the penitentiary, having
been convicted in the district court last
fall on a charge of carnal knowledge of a
minor. The civil action is an outgrowth
of the criminal case.
FRANCESCA Sellner VS.. Mary Conley.
Sleepy Eye people in dispute over the
\ lease of hotel.
X Farmers Seed & Nursery Co. VS..
Springfield Farmers Elevator Co. Plain
tiff is suing for payment for batch of
seed corn, which the defendant alleges
was not as represented.
Henry Schriefer VS.. Ferdinand Hof
schild. Labor dispute over carpenter
work done by the plaintiff. The de-
PENDANT, however, has put in counter
claim to offset all the claims made by the
plaintiff.
Albert A. Paffrath VS.. Herman F.
Wenzel. Case comes from Springfield
and is over land transaction.
The only cases of real Importance are
\ the Hoffmann-W ooldrick labor case and
the personal damage suit of Hesse against
the Northwestern road.
Last spring the calendar was heavy
one, but court business seems to have
dwindled away since that time, the usual
heavy fall calendar last December
having been reduced to IS cases and this
spring the number dropped to a scant
dozen.
Police headquarters may be estab-
fIished in the Dietz block in rear of the