White Pine news. [volume] (East Ely, Nev.) 1920-1923, 1921-12-04
BATES GIVEN VERDICT
FOR AMOUNT ASKED

against e. w. Hulse and others was
tried In the district court this week
before Judge C. ]. McFadden and a
jury and resulted in a verdict In
favor OF the plaintiff Bates, giving
judgment against the defendant
Hulse for the sum of $1,49755, the
total amount sued for, with interes;
at the legal rate of per cent per
annum from December 23, 1916.
Two days we're consumed in the
trial of the case and Wednesday
night the court held night session
at the request of counsel In order
that witnesses from Salt Lake might
return to their homes on the train
Thursday morning.
The testimony was concluded
shortly before the noon recess Thurs
day and the afternoon was given to
the instructions of the court to the
jury and argument of counsel. The
case was given to the jury Thursday
evening and after but a short de-
liberation the verdict was returned
into court.
Following the announcement of
the verdict the defendant announced
that he would apply for new trial
and that in the event of his motion
being denied he would appeal the
case TO the supreme court
Later, however, the two litigants
got together with their counsel and a
settlement was mutually agreed upon,
so the case is now ended
The action arose out of a stock
transaction between the parties and,
according to the opening statement
made by counsel for Bates, was
based upon a claim for damages for
a breach of contract, Bates having
sold certain shares of stock through
Hulse & Co. as brokers and Hulse
having failed to account to Bates
for the profits.
The defense was based upon the
ground that Bates had failed to CON-
ply with his part OF the verbal con-
tract in that when the agreement
was made as part of the agreement
Bates was to send to Hulse 80 shares
OF Nevada Consolidated stock, which
shares he had ordered sold. He fur
ther ordered Hulse to sell short
100 shares OF Utah Copper. The
verbal transaction, according to the
pleadings, was made in Salt Lake
City December Is, 1916.
Hulse contended that he carried
out his part OF the contract and that
Bates refused and neglected to carry
out his part in that he did not send
to Hulss the Nevada Consolidated
stock as agreed. nor did he deposit
any money as a. margin on the
TO Ely some communications passed
between the parties, as was brought
out by the evidence at the trial
ha frfo ~
the opening Of court Monday morn
ing. when the jurors on the present
panel answered the rollcall.
Anthony Jurich, representing the
defendants. filed a motion for a con-
tinuance and read TO the court a
telegram received from Thomas l..
Mitchell. Salt Lake counsel for Hulse,
setting forth that the latter had un-
avoidably missed the train Saturday
morning and consequently could not
reach Ely until Tuesday evening.
The motion was opposed by Attor-
ney Quayle on behalf of the plaintiff
Bates on the ground that the show
ing made was insufficient. He said
TO the court, however, that the plain
tin would not object to the selection
of the Jury from the venire at that
TIME anu WUtu tHt tWtlNt men ndu
been chosen to try the issues there
would be no objection to recess
until Wednesday morning. thereby
giving Hulse opportunity to be pres
ent at the opening of the trial.
Judge McFadden took the position
that the interests of one man could
not he considered as against forty
or fifty who had been summoned as
H. Lx.tx oh a..
leave their business, many of them
having come a considerable distance
in order to be present at the time set
for the trial He said that when
matters were before the court alone
he was at all times willing to ac-
commodate counsel and litigantc
where 1t could be Justly done and
without extra expense to the county.
He then denied the motion and or
dered that the selection of twelve
jurors to try the case be proceeded
with, so that those then drawn might
be excused and the expense mini
mized The court further ordered
that. inasmuoh as demand had been
made by defendants for a jury, the
expense of the twelve jurors selected
to try the case, during the two days
tuuy WCiO Wotthh6 Aoi tue aAA'Sot VI
Hulse, should be met by the latter.
The Jury was quickly selected.
Counsel for the defendants chal-
lenged only two jurors for implied
bias and these challenges were al
lowed. CounsCel for the plaintiff then
exercised two peremptory challenges,
the defense passing all peremptory
challenges.
The twelve jurors selected and
sworn to try the issues in the case
were as follows: Martin Peterson,
Robert T. Nichols, Steve Doutre, Les
ter Robinson, Earl Mangum. J. T.
Trem bath. w. r. Allard, T. c. Win
dous, J. c. Gardner, Frank Hartley.
William r. Knight and r. j Belding.
The testimony of Mr.. Hulse. on
cross denomination by Mr.. Quayle. was
extremely illuminating. particularly
in regard to the magnitude OF his
brokerage business and a. to the ex-
tent of his technical knowledge of the
theory Of ''shorN saies," ~ the follow
ing excerpts from HIS testimony indi-
cate:
n Won u-erp dining A Drettv largo