Ellsworth American., 1926-05-05

| Frank A. Johnson, Foreman,
| Cranberry Isles
| Walter G.. Hart .......... Stonington
| Myron X. Carlisle ........ Ellsworth
| Eugene p. Curtis ......... Bucksport
| Colbv Grav CaStine
| John w. Cousins .... Sedgwick
| Lewis ]. Small ............ Deer Isle
| F. w Grant ........... Hancock
| William Fl. Mason ..... Bluehill
! Adelia peryear ......... fremont
| Charles W. Brown .... Mount Desert
V. b. Black ........H..... broohsNiiio
SUPERNUMERARY.
| Harold A. Kingman Eastprook
The trial of civil cases was COM
Melted Yesterday, and the court took
up the criminal docket.
The Furfey contested divorce case,
which promised an unsayory trlal'
was opened last Wednesday before
the jury by Frederick Hlnckiey,
counsel for Mrs. Furfey, who lett
little unsaid for the delectatlon OF
those court hangers-on who always
hover like vultures over divorce
trials. Fortunately, the public was
| spared further details of the case by
| settlement between counsel Wednes-
dav night. The amount to be paid
to Mrs. Furfey in alimony and coun-
sci fees was not made public, but is
| understood to be above S25,00O.
SALISBURY VS. HAGERTH4 Y.
The first case tried was that or
| Salisbury VS. Hagerthy, which was
opened Thursday morning. This was
an action, or rather two actions
tried together, of Bernell Salisbury,
minor. for $4,000 damages, and
his father, Sherman Salisbury, for
| $4,000 damages, against DR.. u. H.
| Hagerthy of Bar Harbor. The ac-
tions grew out of an injury received
by the boy in December 1924, when
he cut a cash in his right knee
while chopping alders. Plalntlffs
alleged that the wound had not been
| properly treated by the DEFENDANT
and that as result the boy was per-
manently crippled. The jury re-
turned a verdict for the defendant
This was the third time this case
had been tried At the April term
last year, a mistrial was ordered by
the Court because of the question
asked by counsel if defendant was
| insured. The case was again tried
| last October resulting in disagree
ment by the jury.
CUNNINGHAM VS. BARSTOW.
The action OF william II.
Cunningham VS. Henry BarstoW was
opened Saturday. This was an auto
| mobile case, but different; 1t was
not an accident. The plalntlH, VINO
keeps a garage at Bar Harbor, let a
car to the defendant for two months
last summer. The trade was maze
in the spring, and plaintiff agreed TO
put the car, which was an old model,
in good running condition before the
defendant took it. This he claims
he did The defendant took the
car, kept it three weeks, and then
brought it back, claiming it was not
in good condition. Plaintiff brought
an action for breach of contract
claiming damages of $500, the
rental price for the two months
agreed upon. The defendant filed
an account in offset for something
like $40 for expense of repairs ne
had made on the car, by plaintNs
consent. The case went to the jury
Monday afternoon. The jury, late
in the evening, reported disagree
ment.
GREEN VS. KITTREDGE.
The next case to go to the jury
was an equity case, Harriet Banks
Green VS. Richmond H. Kittredge.
The action grew out of mortgage,
plaintiff claiming that because OF a
substantial payment on the mort
gage before the expiration of the
redemption year following fore
closure defendant had waived fore
closure. and defendant claiming
that he had agreed merely to extend
the period of redemption thirty days.
This question of fact was submitted
to the Jury, who answered in favor
of the plaintiff.
CRIMINAL DOCKET.
The criminal docket was taken up
yesterday. There was but one trial,
and in that a verdict was directed
by the Court on motion of the coun-
ty attorney. The traverse jurors
were finally excused for the term
this morning. The grand jury
rose last Wednesday afternoon, re-
porting two indictments, both
against the same man. This is be-
! lived to be a new low-water record
| for indictments in HANCOCK county.
Following is the full criminal
docket, with record of disposal of
cases to date:
Entered October Term, 1928.
By Appeal.
| 25O6 State VS. Lamont Yeaton, single
sale. Mol pressed.
By Indictment.
1926 State VS. Chester r. Damon, libel.
Mol pressed on payment OF
costs
| 253O State VS. Charles E. Fullerton,
evidence was in.
| while Intoxicated. Principal
dnf 111f
| tinued for judgment.
Entered April Term. 1926.
! By Appeal.
| 2531 State VS. John Dolliver, assault.
| Verdict of not guilty directed
| by Court on motion of the
| county attorney, after all the