Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1922-09-22
Cases Tried September
Term Supreme Court

| Court convened Thursday morning
at nine thirty with Judge Scott Will
son presiding. The second jury and
supernumeraries were excused until
II o'clock.
| The first case to demand the at
tention of a jury this term was the
case Of Eugene H. Fletcher Of Pitts
| field and Mrs. Eva A. Conner. also
! of Pittsfield and assigned as num-
Der 43S in the docket.
| Mr.. Fletcher was represented by
! Attorney Coolidge, Pittsfield and the
| defense was in charge OF Attorney
Thomas Anderson of Pittsfield. The
case was opened by Coolidge, who
stated that suit was brought to
recover damages set at 500. The
case as brought out by the testimony
| of the witnesses was that Mrs. Con-
nor was making repairs of her block
| in Pittsfield opposite the Lanccy
| House and that she, through her
| agents. George Tapley and Thomas
j. Knight ordered said Fletcher to
make window frames, and sash and
| to paint same and place them in the
basement of the store teing repaired
with plate glass. The windows were
| two in number and each was to con-
| tain two lights of plate glass. size
! As by 46, a special size cut for the
| windows and a much smaller size
than plate glass is generally cut. The
| frames and sash were made and de-
| liyered. The defense refused to ac-
cept the sash but the frames We're
set and painted. Mrs. Conner,
! through her agents, refused also to
! have the plate glass cut, claiming
| that the bill of the frames, sash and
| work was excessive and that the
F., price Of the plate glass which had
! been received by Fletcher and was
| ready to deliver in week or so after
| ordered by Knight was also of eX-
| cessive price and they wish to as
certain if it were possible to get
rebate on the glass from the COM
pany of whom Fletcher purchased
the glass. The bill for the frames,
sash moulding and labor was $500
and after some time Fletcher dis
counted this bill to s3246. which was
paid and receipted by Fletcher and
at the same time he was presented
with a document drawn up and ready
for his signature and which he stated
that unless he signed he would not
get the s32.46. This paper as well as
the Hills were produced in court, and
this paper the plaintive did not I'M
derstand included the glass, although
the words sin full" were included in
the wording Of the document.
The witnesses for the plaintiff
were Calvin Atkins, Detroit, Ernest
w. Hunt, Pittsfield, and Mr.. Fletcher.
The witnesses for the defense were,
George A. Tapley and Thomas Knight
| both of Pittsfeld. The defense
claimed that the receipted hill of
s3246 included all that Mrs. Eva
Conner owed Fletcher. The first
witness called on the defense was
George A. Tapley. The second Wit
ness for the defense, Knight was
heard. The attorneys made their ar
guments and the judge made his
charge.
The jury after being out a short
length of time brought in a verdict
of s6229.
The second case taken up Thurs
day was George Nagem of Madison
VS.. Joseph Essiff. in which Nagem
was suing to recover. damages for
an assault alleged to have been made
by Essiff. The complainant was
| represented by Attorney w. F. Mer-
rill of Skowhegan, and the defense