Putnam patriot., 1920-11-19
WILLIS CASE BRINGS
 CROWD INTO COURT
Automobile Accident In Which Putnam Woman Was In-
 jured Interests Many
Case Cootinned Uutii Next Week Af.
 ter T~o Days' Hearing

No case that has come up before the superior court sitting at Putnam in many months has attracted such constant interest as that of Miss Jen. nie M. Willis of Putnam vs. Newton A. Ballard of Putnam and Michael J. Kenney of Mechanicsville, which opened in the superior court on We'd nesday before Judge Gardiner Greene.
 Miss Willis makes 8 claim of dam- ages of SIC, 900 for injuries which she received when the cars owned by the two defendants met in collision on Mechanics street, Putnam, on the af- ternsen-of sAaeust ss. sl9l9. At the time. Miss Willis utas riding in the rear of Mr.. Ballard's car. From the opening of &hescouBt son Wednesday morning until the case was put over late Thursday afternoon until next week, the evidence was heard by a crowd which filled the court room to capacity.
 Counsel for the case includes At torney Charles L. Torrey for the plaintiff, Attorneys Charles E. Searls and Howard C. Bradford of Putnam and Attorney Harry E. Back of Dan ielson for Mir. Ballard, while Mr. Ken ney is represented by Attorneys Will liam A. King of Willimantic and Archibald Macdonald of Putnam.
 All kinds of difficulties were en- countered in making up jury for the case. since three different interests are represented and the panel was repeatedly challenged. The jury finally chosen is made up of the following: William E. Light, W. E. Wilmarth, Windham; Otto Hatten, Ashford !; Charles A. Glazier, Hampton; William A. ColwelL, Killingiy; Henry H. Owen, Plainfeld; Byron Wilson, Scotland {; George c. Spooner, Sterling; Harry E. Wells, Woodstock: Willis Covell, F.. K. Haines, Pomfret; Frank w. Ben nett, Dayvine-
 Miss Willis has charged that both of the defendants were responsible for the very serious and painful in- iuries which she suffered because of negligent and careless operation of their automobiles. It was more spe- officially alleged in her behalf that the Ballard caY, ,0in which she was riding, vas proceeding northward toward Me- chanicsvilIe and rtravcling on the right s;;despf eiss isseroaA.snasthststhe -Kenney car was travcling southward and on the left hand side of the road just prior to the collision of the machines; that both drivers immediately before the crash swung their machines to- ward the center of the highway.
 In their answers both defendants denied negligence or careless opera ton of their cars and in Mir. kenney's behalf it was denied that he did not turn his car out in reasonable time to permit the Ballard car to have equally and fair opportunity to pass
 Miss Willis. the first witness sum- moned, described herself as resident on School street and as having lived here for the past IT years, giving nursing as her occupation. During the course of the direct examination by Mr. Torrey the witness stated that four persons were riding in the Bal lard car at the time of the accident Mir. Ba3lard, who was driving; w. Ii. Tyler, who was occupying front seat in the car; Mrs. W. H. Tyler and the witness. who were riding on the rear seat of a five passenger touring car
 Miss Willis said that the kenney car was about the depth of the su- per;or court room out in front of the Ballard car when she first saw 1t. She said that the Ballard car was proceed ing northward on the right, or easter y, siae of the highway. and that the Kennsy car was coming toward it on
 TAA