New Britain herald., 1925-02-14
JUDGE EXONERATES
 ACCUSED LAWYERS
No Fraud in Richards Divorce
 Case, Is Decision

Hartford, Feb. 14,--By an affirm ative judgment in his favor, yester- day, Augustus Loring A Richards, prominent Wall street lawyer, was completely eXoneratcd by Judge Newell Jennings of obtaining his di- vorce from Mrs. Lillian Brown Richards of Greenwich and New York by fraud or coIusion or con- nivance with her lawyers. Arthur Perkins of Hartford and George Rice Coughlin of New York.
 By the same judgment, Mrs. Richards was found guilty of dcl- iberate, wiful and malicious per jury" in presenting her case to the superior court, while her lawyers, William M. Harney and John A. Danaher, were described by the judge as friends of the court for their fair and unselfsh manner in trying the case for her. and their frankness in laying all the evidence before him for his consideration
 lNu bNuNStiS
 The judgment also completely vindicates the professional honor and integrity of Judge Perkins and Mr. Coughlan. both of whom were under fire throughout the trial of the case as a result of Mrs. Rich ards chargers that they were in the hire of Mir. Richards, and for that reason interposed no defense to the action brought by MT. Richards de- spite her reiteration that it was her desire and expressed wish that they should. By introducing them as her witnesses" said Judge Jennings "she vouches that they are credible witnesses and that their testimony is to be believed by me-"
 Usual Judgment
 The Judgment. one of the rarest and most unusual in court prece- dure, came with dramatic sudden ness and was so unexpected that MT. Richards, up until that time, present every moment of the trial, had not considered 1t necessary to be present while his lawyers, Jo- seph r. Berry, and Mrs. Richards lawyers argued respectively for and against the motion fora non-suit made by NIr. Berry. It left Mrs. Richards a broken and fearful wom- an. and greatly affected MT. Rich ards when he learned of it some ten minutes after it had been delivered,
 The judgment came in this way. Mir. Berry at the close of the pres entation of Mrs. Richards case moved for a non-suit. on the ground that she had failed to prove her case. After his argument the court recessed for the noon hour, and with the resumption of the court, Mr. Danaher argued in opposition 10 the motion. Judge Jennings. then. gave his decision, and witho considering the motion for nc suit, went q step farther, and on own motion gave an atiirmat iudgment for MT. Richards, " the remark that while 1t was an usual action for the court to ia "the circumstances requires 1t in case"
 In giving the judgment he tinued the case until Tuesday morn- ing for the double purpose for en- tertaining a motion for modified ton of it, should either side see fit to make one, and of giving . MT Richards an opportunity 10 consider seriously whether he desires 10 pro- secute his counter claim to get aside the agreement by which he pays Mrs. Richards $950 q month and allows her to see the children, so long as she leads a Virtuous life. He made clear, however, that if MT Richards intended to press the counter claim he would want some very definite evidence against Mrs. Richards to be at all interested in