The Denison review. [volume] (Denison, Iowa) 1867-current, 1917-02-14
DISTRICT ] ! 4 G! court U R !. !.
HAS ADJOURNED
Case of Smith vs. Kinney and Wright
Occupied Most of Time-Ver-
dict in Favor Of Defendants
RESULT OF BUILDING FALLING
Another Jury Case Tried Was WEIGH
e. Mcclure VS., Clinton-large
:, Amount Unfinished Business

District court adjourned on Satur-
day after three weeks session. leav-
ing a large amount of unfinished trial
business to go over until next term.
The case which occupied most Of
the time of the term was that of Cath
crime Smith VS. Wright and Kinney
growing out of the collapse OF the
building on Main street on Oct IL,
1915, as a result of which Mrs. Smith
was buried in the ruins of the build
ing and dangerously injured and a
number of other people were also
buried in the ruins and some OF them
died in consequence of injuries sus-
tanned. The jury returned verdict
in favor of the defendants, which, in
view of the courts construction OF the
law. was something of surprise.
The case of Wright and Kinney VS.
Goldheim was tried about a year ago
and a recovery was had against Mr.
Goldheim on the theory of negligence
on the part of the contractor in charge
of the work of wrecking the Goldheim
building at the time the collapse &C.
Cured. w. '
Some people interested in behalf OF
the defendants in the case industrl-
ously circulated the report that the
result of the case tried year ago
exonerated Wright and Kinney from
any blame, and that the fact that they
succeeded in the Goldheim case fur
nished precedent for generating
them from liability in this case, al.
though the issues in this case were
entirely different from the former.
The theory on which this case was
tried by the court was that it was i'm
material who caused the dangerous
and unsafe condition of the Wright
and Kinney building provided this
condition existed at the time Mr.. Ma.
lony was, permitted to move into the
building, and the only question for the
jury was to determine whether or not
the building, at the time, was unsafe
and dangerous. While the. jury was
not specifically instructed by the
court that if the building was unsafe
and dangerous on account of excava-
ton made in the basement OF the
Goldheim building although Goldhelm
was to blame for conditions as they
existed on his lot, this was in effect
the holding of the court. But the jury
evidently took the view that Wright
and Kinney were liable only for such
defective condition of their building
as grew out of inherent defects OF the
building itself, and returned a verdict
accordingly. .'
+ Under the theory of the court the
only possible ground on which the de-.
PENDANTS could escape liability If Mrs.
Smith was rightfully in the building
when it collapsed, was for the jury to
End that the nrnxin,2te cause of the
accident to the woman grew out OF q
slight excavation on the morning OF
the day of the accident, and the plac-
ing of five or six feet Of underplnn,ng
under the east end Of the partition
wall. And yet. the jury in theory
must have taken this view in order to
find a verdict in favor OF the de-
PENDANT. 80.
We are not advised of the intention
of the plaintiff to take an appeal, but
we presume that if a ruling of the
court on the motion for new trial
should be made adversely to the plain
tiff, that the question Of an appeal
will be given proper consideration.
Another jury case tried during the
term was that of WEIGH & Mcclure,
land owners of Buck Grove, VS. Thomas
Clinton.
Thomas Clinton rented farm from
the plaintiffs under a written lease
which contained no provisions In re-
lation to a well or in relation to the
portion of the farm which was seeded
down. Mr.. Clinton failed to pay his
rent and an attachment suit was start
ed against him by the landlords and
his interest in tract of land was at
tached. biz, He appeared in the case and and
contested the plaintiffs right to re-
cover the amount of rent they claim