"No Cause For Action"

"NO CAUSE FOR ACTION"

The Verdict In The Reichert "Alienation" Case.

11 TO 1 ON FIRST BALLOT

Judge Kinne Delivered a Charge Which Could Not Result Otherwise.

The Reichert case, in which the plaintiff, John George Reichert, sued John G. Feldkamp et al. for alienation of his wife's affections, was started last Friday morning and not until yesterday was the trial completed.

At 10 o'clock Judge Kinne charged the jury in a manner that made it seem certain of a verdict of "No cause for action. " Even Mr. Lehman, the attorney for the plaintiff, was heard to remark "That charge beats us."

Said Judge Kinne in substance: "If from the evidence, you find that the wife became estranged or alienated from her husband by reason of the misconduct or ill-treatment of her husband towards her, whether such ill-treatment was real or imaginary on her part, then there is an end of the case, and your verdict should be for the defendants. In order for the plaintiff to recover the change of feelings of the wife toward her husband must be due to active interference of the defendants, or some of them, and they must have been inspired by malicious or dishonest motives. There is no claim that any of the defendants have sought to entice away the wife to appropriate her affections to their own use. If the defendants acted in good faith and from proper and rational motives, and if the wife came to them for sympathy and protection and she went to her relatives because she believed she was an abused wife, they did nothing but what the law justifies. If relatives called to the aid of the wife Mr. Zahn and Mr. Veldkamp, and they acted without malice or improper motives, they did nothing the law forbids. And if the defendants expressed themselves in severe terms about the plaintiff or advised unwisely, but honestly, they did nothing but that transgressed the law. There is no evidence of any conspiracy in the case."

The jury were out about three hours when they came into court with a verdict of "no cause of action." They stood 11 to 1 on the first ballot in favor of the defendants. Said one of the jurymen to the Argus: "The only point on which there was any dispute was whether or not Mrs. Reichert intended to permanently leave home at the very time she went away or whether she was influenced to remain away after she had left."