OCR Text |
Show jSUED FOR DAMAGE jllowe & Taft Against the Woolen Mills Co. Involving the Question as to Who Owns Eletric Light Fitting's After a Customer Pays for Placing Them in Position. j A civil suit was heard before Jus-1 j tice Noon yesterday, occupying his entire en-tire time curing the day. The suit was j brought by Howe it Taft and against the Woolen Mills Co. It appears that I Howe & Taft had the electric light put I into their store some time since, and j w hen the summer was fairly in, thinking think-ing that the light was too' expensive I for the short summer nights, they noti--fied the company that they wanted the j light shut off." The company then I claimed the right to take the lamps and I all the fittings out of the store. To this j Howe Taft objected, stating that they ! had bought all the fittings and there-j there-j fore would not allow them to go out of j their possession. j The Woolen Mills Company there ! pon took out an attachment on the iitlings and removed them. Howe & Taft are now suing for damages on I hese grounds. D. 1). Houtz is the attorney for the j plaintiff, and Dudley & Woods appear-I appear-I ed for the defendants. The witnesses J were Howe & Taft for the comp'ainant land T. E. Daniels and Jos. F. Dunn j for the defense. I The plaintiff claims that when the i littings were placed in the store they ' paid $2,) for ten lamps, and that they j received a receipt for it, together with j the understanding that all the fittings i belonged to them, so that in event of I another electric li-ht plant being i placed in l'rovo, they could choke off ; from the present company and connect j with its competitor. I The defense maintained that no such agreement was entered into, and that the $25 was for wiring and insulation. After the evidence was all in, and arguments ar-guments made by the attorneys. Judge Noon took the case under advisement, lie will render his opinion to-day at 4 ! o'clock. |