Morgan County Democrat. (McConnelsville, Ohio) 1886-1943, 1935-09-19
Court House News
COMMON PLEAS COURT
Transcripts From J. p. Court

III l.. N. seaman, j.. r., court, nave
been filed in common pleas court, as
follows, to be investigated by the
grand jury which meets Monday:
The state of Ohio VS.. Nathan Wade,
shooting with intent to kill; Taylor
F. Shriver, fraud; John Cisler, Otto
Wintgens, neglect to provide for
children, and Floyd Woodward,
abandoning pregnant woman.
Divorce Action Dismissed
The divorce case of Gladys Kin
caid VS.. Vernette Kincaid, has been
dismissed at cost Of plaintiff, with
out prejudice to a future action
Files Answer To Cross Petition
Defendant files answer and cross
petition in the case of Elmer Kirk
patrick VS.. Taylor F. Shriver, in
which plaintiff asks for judgment in
the sum of $411.25,' alleged due on
certain promissory notes. Defend
ant denies owing said amounts;
claims that by certain agreements
proceeds of certain live stock held
by plaintiff and defendants, were to
be applied on said notes. Defend
ant in cross petition says there is
due him from plaintiff the sum Of
$105.55 on account, for work and
labor, and asks judgment for that
amount.
In the case Of Elmer Kirkpatrick
VS.. Taylor F. and Eura Shriver in
which plaintiff asks Judgment in the
sum of 5000, defendants deny that
the principal and interest on said
note were due at the time of filing
of plaintiffs petition. Defendants
aver that it was understood and
agreed to that defendant should ap-
ply certain money they then had on
hands for payment on said note, for
payment of other debts owing by
them, and plaintiff agreed that
same should be done, and that any
peyment by defendant to plaintiff on
note should be deferred until cer-
tain live stock was sold, when
agreed upon by both plaintiff and
defendants as contract provided
Defendants admit the execution and
delivery of the promissory note to
the City Loan & Guaranty company
of Lima, but deny that note is due
and payable as alleged in plaintiff s
petition.
In the delinquent tax foreclosure
action of Lionel G. Roberts, county
treasurer, VS.. estate of Della Faires,
deceased, ct AL order to sell prop
erty as upon execution according to
law.
Divorce Case Filed
:. Woodie L. Summers, by Louise
Quigley, her next friend, files suit
for divorce from Arthur P. Sum-
mers. Said plaintiff is II years of
age, and they were married June 2,
1885, at McConnelsville. Plaintiff
says defendant has been guilty Of
gross neglect Of Duty that he has
wholly failed, neglected and refus-
ed to provide plaintiff with "a proper
home, food and clothing, and that
she has been obliged to live upon
the charity of her parents and what
she has been able to earn by her
own efforts. Plaintiff says that
prior to their marriage defendant
represented to her that he had
means with which to care for her,
all of which was false. Petition
states also that defendant has been
guilty of extreme cruelty; of nag
ging and abusing her, frequently
arousing her in the middle Of the
night, seeking to quarrel with plain
tiff, and in anger leaving the house,
and she would not know of his
whereabouts the remainder of the
night; that on one occasion he in a
rough manner shook plaintiff vio-
lently; that he has frequently in
dulged in profane, obscene and in
sulting language, and has refused to
accompany her to visit her friends
or to go elsewhere, and objected to
her going, and as result of the cruel
conduct she became nervous and i'll.
Plaintiff further states that defend
ant frequently at church and Sun
day school and at her parents home
where they resided would indulge
in talk, conversation and argument
of "Red" and radical nature, to the
great embarrassment and humilia-
tion Of plaintiff. Plaintiff states
that by reason of his conduct she
was obliged to separate from de-
fendant and repudiate their mar
that she be divorced and restored
to her maiden name, Woodie Quig-
ley.
Answer Filed In Divorce Action
In the divorce action of Woodie
l.. Summers, by Louise Quigley, her
next friend, against Arthur P. Sum-
mers, the defendant files answer
in which he denies he has been gull
ty of gross neglect of duty, and has
wholly neglected. failed or refused
to provide proper home, food and
clothing for plaintiff. He ayers he
has at various times urged plaintiff
to leave her mothers home and join
him in establishing a home of their
own; defendant further says that
due to the interference of plain
tiff's mother, plaintiff has refused
the numerous requests of defendant
that they establish their own home,
and he states that even during
plaintiffs residence with her moth
er he has not only furnished cloth
ing for plaintiff, but provided food
from June Z until Aug. 7, for the
entire Quigley family. Defendant
states that on Aug. IA he and
plaintiff rented furnished rooms
and lived together as man and wife
until Aug. %; that they had select
ed their household furniture and
had ample funds in the bank to pay
for same; that on Aug. %, Louise
Quigley prevailed upon plaintiff to
return to her mothers home upon |
the pretense that said Louise Quig-
ley's health was in a serious cOndi- |
tion and she was in need of her
care, which was untrue |
and known by said Louise Quigley |
to be untrue, and that said false |