BREACH OF PROMISE SUIT.
BIGGEST CLAIM EVER MADE.
JURY UNABLE TO An il
Mr Arthuj. Hoe, son of the lai; Robert Hoc, the millionaire builder of ■ Intiug presses, defendant in a suit brought by Miss Man Sullivan to recover ,£30,000 for breach of pronL.se of marriage, and “,£15,000 as ex'"". 1 .” admitl i that he had fund, d a fiat for her and Miss Brrnrigun. so that they “rr ; ght na a t? ; r start in life.’’ P coutr-> dieted plain tiff’s version ui the meeting over a cup of tea in a New York hotel. “Witness said : “My wife and baby were in the Abriondacks, at my mother’s cabin, in September, 1911, when I met Miss Sullivan. I met her and Miss Brannigan somewhere on Broadway, New York. It was cloudy and raining. I had an umbrella, and, seeing the two young ladies without one, asked them it I could not take them under mine.
“They said they were not going very far. I made an appointment to meet them next day (Sunday).’’ His talk with the young woman lasted only five or ten minutes, witness said. He told of meeting them next day and taking them to a cafe for dinner. He also related how he made several trips with Miss Sullivan and Miss Brannigan to a store, buying furniture for the apartment. The furniture was sent in Miss Brannigan’s name, witness said, and his reason for fitting up the apartment was that the young women might have a fair start, Miss Sullivan having told him she was an orphan and had no one to help her.
Hoe declared he bad given his right name and address and telephone number to Miss Sullivan the first time he had dinner with her, and told her also that he was married and had a baby. The cheque of the cafe was produced, showing Hoe’s business address and telephone number in his own handwriting. Hoe swore he had never kissed Miss Sullivan or laid hands on the girl or “choked her,” as counsel suggested, never proposed to her, or given her a ring. The jury were discharged without reaching a verdict. Eight believed the girl's story that at the age of 17 the defendant took advantage of her under a promise of marriage, but four did not. Miss Sullivan was not in court when the jury where discharged, but her counsel intimated that there would be another trial, whereupon Mr Hoe’s representative replied: “And we will beat you again.” Miss Sullivan, when informed that the jury had disagreed, burst into tears. She had been annoyed during the eight days’ hearing by process servers thrusting writs upon her, and seemed very nervous.
It is stated that the claim for ,£30,000 damages and ,£15,000 for “extras” is one 01 the biggest ever made, even against a miT jnaire defendant.
Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/MH19140723.2.22
Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka
Manawatu Herald, Volume XXXVI, Issue 1275, 23 July 1914, Page 4
Word count
Tapeke kupu
476BREACH OF PROMISE SUIT. Manawatu Herald, Volume XXXVI, Issue 1275, 23 July 1914, Page 4
Using this item
Te whakamahi i tēnei tūemi
Stuff Ltd is the copyright owner for the Manawatu Herald. You can reproduce in-copyright material from this newspaper for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International licence (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0). This newspaper is not available for commercial use without the consent of Stuff Ltd. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.