Evening Republican, Volume 17, Number 278, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 20 November 1913 — HAPPENINGS OF CIRCUIT COURT [ARTICLE]

HAPPENINGS OF CIRCUIT COURT

Case of Jay W. Stockton vs Edward „ f P. Lane Being Tried Before Special Judge. The cISe of the State of Indiana on relation of Jay W. Stockton, against Edward P. Lane, and his bondsmen, is being heard before Moses Leopold as special v -judge. This case had been pending for more than a year, and is.an action for damages. Mr. Stockton is seeking to recover $250.00 for the hauling of his children to the Blue Grass school in Newton township, alleging that the trustee maliciously neglected to furnish transportation for such children. The defense is on the theory that Mr. Stockton, having been attached to Blue Grass school by the enumeration of the trustee, and having never been enumerated in the abandoned school district of Saylerville, is not entitled to transportation. The law provides for transportation of certain children of abandoned districts. A further defense of the trustee is that Mr. Stockton took it upon himself voluntarily to transport the children, in other words to perform an official duty which the officer failed to perform, and having done so voluntarily and without any agreement with the trilstee cannot recover for his services; even though his children were entitled to be transported. • , , Mr. Stockton seeks to show that he is a patron of the abandoned district of Saylerville, regardless of the enumeration of the trustee by which his children were attached to Blue Grass school, and that being a patron of the abandoned district of Saylerville, he‘had a right to transport his own children and recover pay for his services from the trustee and his bondsmen by way of damages. The case of State of Indiana on relation of Jay W. Stockton vs. Edward P. Lane, trustee, to mandate the trustee to transport his children to the Rensselaer schools is also set for trial today before Judge Hanley. Mr. Stockton claims to be entitled to have his children sent to Rensselaer tor school purposes, for the reasons as set in the case above mentioned. John A. Dunlap represents Mr. Stockton in the first action and W. W. Lowry, of Indianapolis, in the second action. George A. Williams is representing Mr. Lane in both actions. All the evidence in the GaffieldShide partition fence case has been heard by the court and the court will probably render his decision at a later day ih the term.