Press enter after choosing selection

The City Won Its Case

The City Won Its Case image
Parent Issue
Day
21
Month
April
Year
1899
Copyright
Public Domain
OCR Text

The íirst case iu the circuit court Wednesday was that of Matthew Soser vs. the city of Ann Arbor, M. J. Lehinan and Lee N. Browu appearing 'or the plaintiff and City Attorney Butterfield for the city. Ou a statement of the plaintjff's case by Mr. [jehmau, it was taken fronu the jury aud a verdicc ordered for the defendant. The case as stated by plaintiff's at;orneys v as as f ollows : Roser had been ïll for some time and on the occasion of his airest was sitting in the hall of lis premises near a door which was ajar. He claiined to have got up to take some medicine aud in some way lost consciousness. He was discovered in this coudition by Officer Colliife and arrested as a drunk and disorderly. He was taken to the jail, kept there over night and then allowed to go after paying alleged costs amonnting to something like two dollars. No charge was ever brought against him. Later ne commenced action against the city for damages. The plea on the part of the city was that it was not responsible for the act of its pólice officers. That the acts of such officials pertain to sovereignty and that the ïnunicipality was in no way liable. That if the matter was actionable action would have to be taken against the oft'endiug officer. Such a case has never been before the Michigan supreme court but numerous cases of the kind have beenpassedupon in various other states the decisions all being íh accordauce witli the posifion taken by the city. This was conceded by the plaintiff's attorueys. Mr. Lehman contended, however, that in case of flagrant abuse of authority, like the oue in hand, there shonid be some remedy against the city. Otherwise there would in most cases of the kind be no remedy, for most pólice offlcers were finaucially without liieans. ïo deny the responsibility of the city was to refnse the citizen any relief. Plaintiff's attorneys say the case will be taken to the supreme court. They were given 90 davs'in which to file a bilí of esceptions. Had the case not been taken from the iury by the conrt the city would have attempted to show that Roser had been clrinking tbat he was asleep on the sidewalk uud that he was so iritoxicated that he was even druuk the next inorning. No defeuse was offered in the case of Srnith Botsford vs. the Edgewood Jersey Milk Co. and judgement was giveu the plaiutiff for 1448.52. The defendaut was a Detroit cornpany whicl had established au agency at Dixboro and quit business owing the farmers thereabouts considerable rooney. Botsford had Drought suit for his own claim and those of a nuniber of the farmers which he had purcbased. Judgnient by default of $3ö2,95 was entered by Charles Merriam & Co. vs. Charles Waguer. The compauy levied upon Wagner's interest in his father's estáte in Scio. When the court proceeded to the other cases on cali, they dropped out for one canse or another uutil none were ieft, when the court excnsed the jury uutil 9 o'clock Thursday rnorning. The jurynieu are haviug au easy time this trip. Patrol inau Collins received a complinieut in the Koser va. Aun Arbolease wheii in eiiipauelliug a jury the plaiutiff's attorueys asked W. W. Wadhams, the merchaut, whether he would give equal weight to the oath of a man he didu't kuow and the oath of offleer Collins. He answáred: "No I wonld not. He would be1 eve Uollius. ' ' He was excused and siid aftervvards that he would believe ö)llius' oath as against that of five or six uien he didu't kuow.