The Monte Vista journal., 1920-05-29
some INTERESTING CASES
IN The DISTRICT court

~" 'ase OF A. u Neil and Shrtvs
Collins vs.. u. \. Penney. tried To
Jury. resulted In u verdict for the
plaintiff. This case grew out os tho
fact that tho plaintiffs agent was
driving along tho public highway
With a wheat driii behind wagon
To which was h,tchcd = pair OF m ul.>
Mr. Penney. the defendant was driv-
'ns In the same direction and whom
h. attempted to drive past. he
struck ono Of the mules and brok, n.
leg. The Jury returned q verdict
for a sum OF tlSs.Oo.
Case OF Bushingcr Va iicndcrdson
was tried to n Jury. returning = vcr-
diet In favor OF Bushingcr for Ssi2.
The c'vil case exciting the greatest
amount OF interest at this term Of
court was the case Of =. T.. Ticrncy
VS.. Lucius Bccraft: which was some
what complicated and grew out Of tho
toiiowihg state OF facts.
II seems that In December 1913.
Mr.. Tierney entered into u contract
with Jose Espinoxa whereby Il
was agreed that Espinoxa would
take charge Of a flock Of sheep for
Tierncy. The sheep were properly
branded and put In the hands Ut Es-
pinoza who had possession Of same
until January. 1920.
Becraft sought to purchase 1000
head OF sheep from Espino.a which
ne then claimed to have upon the
Godfrey ranch In Conejos County; he
looked at the sheep and called Mr..
Tierney who was then In Denver and
asked him II Espinosa had any Of his
sheep and received the reply from
Tierney In the affirmative. He stat
ed that EspinoxS had some twelve or
fifteen hundred OF HIS own together
with some Of Tierney's and that his
sheep were all branded "F. T." and
that It was all right for Becraft to
purchase and recommended MIR. Es-
pinoza very highly whereupon BE-
craft purchased 800 sheep from Es-
pinosa for the price OF $4,000. 90 pay
Ing him In full and receiving the
sheep on the 10th day Of January.
1920.
When the sheep were delivered to
Becraft there were l5 head branded
IF. T." and when Becraft called Es-
pinoza's attention to this fact Espin-
oza claimed that through some mis-
take when they were shearing sheep
a few were branded "F. T." but that
they were his and he had the right to
hold them.
After the sheep were delivered Be-
craft took them into his possession
and afterward Tierney claimed the
sheep and valued them at $500.
On Becraft's refusal to give up pos
session OF the sheep. Tierney brought
this action In replevin and Bscraft
giving a delivery bond returned pos
session OF the sheep.
The case was tried to a Jury OF
twelve and was one OF the closest con
tested cases that has been tried in
tho court for some time. The Jury
returned verdict giving Tierney Is
head OF the sheep that bore his
brand and valued them at $4,000.
The turning point in the case a.
gainst Tierney was that he had failed
to record his contract with the Cour-
ty recorder: our statute providing
that one who holds contract of
this character may record the same
and after recorded 1t gives cOnstruc-
tive notice to the world Of the con-
tractors interest. Tierney having
failed to record his contract the Jury
thought he was not entitled to recov-
er as against Becraft who had pur-
chased the sheep without notice of
Tierney's claim. Jesse Stephenson
represented Tierney and James =.
veerkamp represented Becraft.