New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1917-08-14
Unnecessary Litigation
A Case Which Might Have Been
Settled Without Trial

To the Editor of The Tribune.
Sir The writer lately took a part in
lawsuit in which the plaintiff recovered $3.50
for alleged damage TO dress goods caused by
water overlooking from the washtubs in de-
| PENDANTS kitchen to plaintiffs apartment be-
low.
Plaintiff claimed s1,eOs damage to about
60 pieces of goods, many of them dress
makers remnants. Said goods were produced
in court. The two witnesses who visited
plaintiffs apartment soon after the overflow
and to whom the damaged goods were shown
by plaintiff failed to recognize more than q
few Of the pieces. The expert in court
examined each infinitely and finally gave his
estimate of the total damage to goods ex-
hibited as S120. The scene in court as piece
after piece was pronounced perfect" i. e.,
unchanged by water, bordered on the ludi-
crous under the cross-examination of plain
tiff by defendants lawyer. The jury Several
Of whom happened to be in the drygoods
business) were grinning with enjoyment, and
even the plaintiffs lawyer smiled wanly.
After the trial a'juryman said that the est.
mate of damage by members of the Jury
(Which took about ten minutes to decide be-
ing in a hurry to get home to supper) varied
from $25 to $500. They probably split the
difference to appease the $500 conscientious
objector.
Thus the total cost in money to defendant,
including damages, lawyers and court fees.
of a few minutes neglect on the part of the
washerwoman was over s7Oo This leaves out
of consideration the work involved in plan
ming the defence, the worry of the laws de-
lay and uncertainty and so on. No reference
was made by the lawyers, the Judge or jury
to the lack of proof that the goods exhibited
were damaged at that time and place, though
much of the evidence showed the contrary.
No allowance was made for the plaintiffs
readiness at any time to pay for such damage
as could be properly proved and so keep the
matter out Of court, nor for the fact that the
washtubs in question lacked such a reason
able precaution as an overflow pipe.
This is correct statement of this case as
far as it goes, but for the purposes of this
writing it's accuracy does not much matter,
for it is plainly type of numberless others
such as any one will recall as showing the
uncertainty and injustice of the law. Any
fair minded person hearing the facts would
appreciate the real truth of the situation and
estimate the damage at a few dollars; yet
after six months delay and much inconven.
fence to witnesses and other innocent people
the defendant is out OF pocket $780,
Surely there ought to be some power
lodged In the judge or magistrate 20 prevent
such cases coming into court, and the jury
often fattered and indirectly encouraged in
its sense of .irresponsibility by the court,
should be emphatically charged as to the
gravity Of its duties and the need of a de-
cision on the merits of the case, not the in.
dividual impulses or prejudices of its mem
bers. If it renders decision manifestly I'M
just the court should be able TO quash il
without subjectng the injured party to the
further penalty of an appeal to get his
rights. And lastly, there ought TO be drastic
punishment for those who conspire against
the goods and peace of their neighbors and
waste the time and resources of the state by
insisting on bringing into a court of law
cases that in all right and reason ought to
stay outside. TESTS.
New York, Aug. Z, 1911.