| Show JURY URY j AT PROVO AGREE PROVO april 14 the case of the state ve va jamee james duffey came up for trill before a jury ednes clay in the fourth district court defendant who Is 1 connected with ith the luko luke collecting agena Is 1 charged with ith falsely impersonating a duner ditner and rio orande grande claim agent at thistle january for the purpose of securing information whereby a benefit might accrue to him from I 1 oula A I 1 te C A fullmer thomas hill and J 11 II brown in an accident thit occurred it tt thistle january th in which aich joseph G sheppard v w is injured and from the effects of which he lie lost his left foot the tile information bought by duffey it Is alleged was aas to be used in a it damage suit by Sli eppard rl I 1 agn I 1 t the r tilro id in which th the attorneys for bh 15 eppard heppard were cre to racele a contingent fee a third of the amount recovered as brought out in the evid evidence enec ct and duffey act I 1 as tb the 0 o r of th tit at lit in the cise c ise a at was brough brought out li it the tile evidence in the tile negotiations sheppard the at tornes for the plaintiff are 1 nalton alton geore geor e 11 hancock IIan cuck and find franci Fran cist 1 5 luhe luke nalton niton defending duffey AIt witnesses nesses for the state testified that duffel duffe represented himself as the claim agent of the road rod which he denied dt aled the llense I also con tends that he lie ric received elved a benefit from front such representation if ench such was had S II 11 Th in of coun act 1 for the railroad and II 11 11 gibbs claim agent were mere present during the tile trial district attorney attorney y harvey blutt prosecuted the lur ju r ors were mere saable to agree three stood for conviction and five for acquittal |
