Click image to open full size in new tab
Article Text
Court Notes. The case of the state against David Bear, for the murder of his son, was dismissed at the cost of the state, Edgar being present to prove that he was not dead. John Kelly, who was charged with stealing a horse at Fellsburg, plead guilty and was sentenced to the state reform school or the Hutchinson reformatory, which means that if, for any reason, he can not be received at the reform school, he will be taken to Hutchinson. He Mill be held till the authorities think he is cured of the stealing habit and then discharged. The case which excited the most interest was the Bear vs. Cunningham C DW case. A large number of witneses were in for each side, but after listening to the testimony the jury took only about five minutes to decide that the heifer in dispute belonged to Cunningham. The court costs in this case amount to $136.90, which Beare will have to pay in addition to his attorney's fees. The case of J. J. Thomas vs. William Shadwell was decided in favor of Thomas. In this case there was a dispute as to wages due, the amount in dispute being but a few dollars, but the costs have run up to about $70, which Mr. Shadwell will have to pay in addition to the judgment. On application the receiver of the Exchange bank was discharged and Mr. Hine was directed by the court to apportion the remaining money to the creditors and pay it into the court for the clerk to distribute. The case of Shadwell vs. Topliff was decided in favor of Shadwell, the jary allowing him $425. The history of this case is this: Mr. Shadwell bought the old Jake Schmidt property for $2,500, but when it came to making a deed Topliff failed to make a satisfactory deed, and Shadwell brought suit to recover the money paid out in improving the property and for the damages he had sustained in selling off his property in the country and moving to town. The attorney headed off this latter feature by coming into court and offering to make a satisfactory deed, pay all the court costs and Shadwell's attorneys. Shadwell's attorneys refused to accept this for him, which showed that Shadwell did not want to carry out the original deal so the jury gave a compromise verdict on the amount that had been expended for the betterment of the property. Topliff's attorney then, in the presence of witnesses, demanded possession of the property in the name of his client.
