Western Reserve chronicle. [volume] (Warren, Ohio) 1855-1921, 1868-04-15
DIstrIct Court ProceedIngs.


The District Court began its session on
Monday, the 9Th inst, with Supreme
Judge Brinkerhof presiding, assisted by
Common Pleas Judges Tuttle, Freese and
Chaffe. Judge Jacob Brinkerhof Is q
fine, bright looking man, about 60 years
of age. He has been msny years on the
Supreme Bench, and has been long con
sidered one Of the keenest lawyers in the
State. He Wal a Democratic member OF
Congress years ago, and while there, it has
been claimed, for him, that he wrote the
famous Proviso which David Wilmont, Of
Pennsylvania, introduced and secured the
credit Of. he was an early convert to the
old Free Soil party, and has been true to
the faith aver since.
There we're % cases on the docket, 10
Of which were marked for trial. But of
these, many were reserved, i. e., taken up
to the Supreme Court, without trial here,
and the important cases Of VanGorder vs..
The Warren Gas Light Company, and
Logan vs.. Beamsn, ct. al, referred-the
former to Hon. jacob Amber, and the
latter to r. W. Ratlif, ESQ.
The first case tried was thst of Milton
Sutlif VI. Alex. Mcconnell. This was
quite an important suit, and involved some
very nice questions. It's history is some
thing like this: Alexander Mcconnell
borrowed some money of Milton Sutlif,
and gave him in return his note with the
names Of Samuel Quinby and james Nc
Council as sureties. To secure the sureties,
Mcconnell executed 8 mortgage covering
II particular piece of land. Sometime
afterwards, Mcconnell, desiring to borrow
money of John Anderson, went to Quinby
and represented that the Sutlif note had
been paid, upon which representation
Quinby released the mortgage as far IS his
interest was concerned. Thereupon An
derson advanced money to Mcconnell and
took g mortgage upon the same piece Of
land, covered BY the first mortgage. This
suit is brought to subject the land to sale
in payment Of the Sutlif note. The
Court below held that the release by
Quinby was not under the circumstances,
- valid and binding one, and that, con
sequently, the plaintiffs prayer should be
granted. This decision was sustained and
confirmed here.
The next case submitted was that of
Kline vs.. Cssterliue, = very interesting
one. The facts were substantially IS fol-
lows: One Graft had a farm in Bszetta for
sale. BE and Catherine had had a talk
aOoat this sale, but as they could not agree
fully sG 70 the terms, no definite under
standing was had. Subsequently,, Graft
sold this same farm to Kline, on q written
contract for $50 per acre. Very Ioon
after this sale, and before 3 deed had
passed to Kline, Casterline, with full
knowledge of the sale by written contract,
induced Graft 70 sell to him for $40 per
acre. In this case, Graft and wife madea
warranty deed to Casterline. This suit is
brought by Kline to compel a specific per-
Torrance Of the written contract, which
the court, after a full and patient hearing
of all the facts, and tho law bearing upon
the same, ordered done. But under the
peculiar state Of facts, the Court found
that each party should psy his own costs.
The next case tried was that Of the Ad-
ministrator of A. Crater VS.. Adam Lyn.
Many years ago Gr@ter gave to Lyn a
mortgage covering the lot known as the
''Greter corner" IN this town. Greter's
Administrator now claims that this
mortgage has been paid in full and should
be cancelled, but this court, with the one
below, held that there was no proof to war
, ant such a CONCLUSION, and therefore find
for defendant.
The next case was that Of Miller vs..
Mcdonnell. Years ago Mcconnell gave
to Miller a mortgage, the description in
which answered to either one Of two lots
on South street, in this place. The question
in this case was, is the mortgage to Miller
so uncertain and indefinite as to render it
void, as against subsequent mortgages
covering the ssEae property, but which are
not uncertain or indefinite: The court
found that the description in the mortgage
to Miller vas sufficiently certain and
definite as to leave no reasonable doubt as
to which lot il was intended to cover, and
SO rendered a decree for plaintiff.
The above were the principal and
important cases tried. The court adjourn.
ed on Thursday morning.