The Lancaster news. [volume] (Lancaster, S.C.) 1905-current, 1918-03-19
Three Cases Disposed of Yester
day Though Court Adjourn
ed at Eleven O'clock.
INTERESTING POINT LAW
Cotton Contract Calling for Spe
cific Delivery at Certain Date
is Held Valid by Court and
Plaintiff is Awarded Verdict.

In the court house yesterday morn
ing when the Common Pleas Court
convened from that of the preceding
Monday when criminal cases we're to
be tried. Outside of jurors and reg
ular attaches, and lawyers, there
were not a dozen men present. Civil
cases attract little attention of cur
rioslty seekers and spectators
throughout yesterday were few.
Litigation. as matter of fact has
materially fallen off in Lancaster
county recently. the influence of
good crops and plenty of money be-
ing given as the cause. People are
paying up" better than usual.
The first case taken up was Ian
caster Mercantile company VS., +. G.
Bell. Judgment for plaintiff by de-
fault. $500.
Mackey VS.. Mellow. Verdict for
plaintiff by agreement of counsel.
$132.79.
Nesbit and Wilson VS.. w. p. Rob-
inson, assigne of Geo. f.. Ferguson
Verdict for plaintiff. This was
suit for recovery of $l.l2455 on a
cotton contract and to determine
validity of claim The contract
made last July, called for the deliv-
cry of the cotton between October l
and November Is. at 25 cents. Only
part of it was delivered, and the
plaintin in the suit claimed the diff
ference in the price of the undelivered
cotton on date it should have been
delivered and the contract price
This was 3 l-2 cents the pound and
amounted to S1,124.55 At meet
ing Of the creditors of Geo. f Fer.
guson objection was raised to the
claim and the assigne therefore sub
mitted il to the court.
Court adjourned at 1910 until
$3.50 this morning.
This Mornings Session.
The first case taken up this morn
ing was II. T. Williams. admr., of
Margaret T.. Williams, VS.. Philadel-
phia Life Insurance company. n suit
to recover $4,000 damages und.,
alleged breach of contract. through
the cancellation of a policy OF life
insurance. issued but not delivered to
or accepted by the plaintiff. Diane.
Morris and Heckster Wilson and
Wilson and Stack and Parker and
Claud y. Sapp represented
IN edefendant; Williams and
Williams and Stewart and Jones and
Jones represented the plaintiT. THIS
case was tried at the March term CT
court. 1915, and appealed to the SUI
preme court. a new trial being
granted.
The action grew out of The applica
tion for $40 900 life insurance on the
life of Margaret f. Williams. upon
which application the Philadelphia
Life Insurance company issued one
or more policies, different from that
applied for. and those issued were
returned to the company and can
celled without the knowledge or
consent of the applicant. The Cor
don Insurance and Investment com
pany, of Monroe. ~ c., was general
'gent for the company for North and
South Carolina
The policy issued is dated Decem-
ber 2S, 1910, and is for $4,000:
premium. s1O1.O6: 2O-year endown
ment policy, accumulated surplus
The policy applied for was Term
insurance"
Every inch OF ground in the case
was hotly contested and there wero
numerous objections on the part of
counsel. III. T. Williams was tn,
aren't writing the application of his
wife. Between objections Of oppos-
Ing counsel and rulings of the court
the witness managed to make few
etatements. He was on the stand for
nearly two hours.
G. NJ. Whisrant was the next wit
ness called and tod OF the custom in
correction with delivery OF policies
and the court ordered his testim ony
stricken out as hearsay.
b. VI. Culp told of the general Gus
tom so far as his knowledge goes in
delivering policies.
Motion was made by nla'ntiff's
counsel to amend COMPLAINT IN con-