New Britain herald., 1924-03-11
EVICTION HEARING
 BROUGHT ID CLOSE
Justice Roche Reserves Decision
 in Business Dispute

Closing arguments were offered
 yesterday afternoon before Justice
 Henry P. Roche in city court in the
 summary process action brought by
 Eliza Hadley against the Conhors-
 Halloran Stores. Inc. After argu-
 ments had been presented, the court
 reserved decision. Both parties in the
 action have signified their intention of
 appealing from the decisioS Of the
 court.
 The trial was adjourned last Fri
 day afternoon until yesterday when il
 mas resumed at o'clock. George A. Lloyd, manager of the store. who was on the stand al adjournment, was the first to be examined. He was the last direct witness to be heard in the case. and both sides then put witnesses in rcbuttal.
 The case is one of the most inter- ,stins that has ever come up in the New Britain city court and was per baps the most vigorously contested. The Hadley interests claim lease that they entered into with the Con nors-Halloran company has been for feited as result of violation of a clause in the lease that stipulates that the rent is due on tia first day of the month. and must be paid by the 18th. or the lease will be automatically for feited.
 The lease is for 10 years and was effective on March l. 1921. The evi- 1 dence presented in the case shows that the rent was paid promptly until De- eember, l922, when the delinuucncies | started. The deiinquencies ran from l q couple of days to almost Il month. l They continued until November aS. 1 1923, when the Eadley interests sery- ed notice on the owners or the store | 10 vaeate the premises. They claim l that since that date the defendants ia l the action ha,e had no right to the l premises.
 The pIairtIH ia'fodrced evidence l that a letter had pe,n sent to the ocI- | itls at tho .tore if April of last yea. | sGiae ioat he terms af the leas" | must be strictly adhered to or n for. 1 f.iture would Dc declared.
 II is also claimed that an assign mont or the lease 10 Herman Colo stein Of New York broke the lease, as II was done without tfe consent O the lessor is the lease provides.
 What Defense Claims
 Tn" defense in the action Is bas"f on the contention thtt t1e Hadlny in- tcrests established + waiver oI tae rent clause in the leasp by accepting the rent late every mngth. ard that il they did not wish 70 caIfy on that waiver they were bound To notify thc officials of thu store Of their int'aation 10 declare the lease ioftettth. If in thr future, the terms were nor adhered To. The defense denied that Il letter had been received by the eonpan. say- ing that the lease must be confurmed with. and eontended that, rs.n II il hal. he fact that after that time the rent mas paid late. md nc Forfeiture nils declared. established another AtliAer.
 The eonnors- Halloran company was Il clothing company and took mp the . occupancy of the store after the !; 1jessc-i Leland company vacated the Mir. Connors withdrew from tho company after q short time and money Has invested in tho company N l.. Now York interests, Mr, Iiallorau with the company as man agnr. It was then organized as the Gonnors- Halloran Stores, Inc. Eyid- tnce introduced in the case tended to show that in March 1923. Mir. Hallor- an was stripped Of all his authority by the company and George A. Lloyd was II ade manager Of the store.
 Mr 1IaIlpruu aUlE1 q r4i nip 1 spice to the trial as he showed in no manner just what his feel ings were toward the new officials of the company although he maintained throughout his testimony that he was friendly to the company.
 French farmers whose families | have cultivated the soil for moro