The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1874-02-28
BROOKLYN COURTS.
SUPREME COqRT- PeCA. TERM.
Alleged Fraud llent Rcplegenta tiOos

Before Judge Gilbert.
O. G. Bennett VS.. Warner ct ALT Is claimed By
the plaintiff In this case that In October, 1871 two
OF the defendants, EgDert l.. Bennett and Helen G.
Bennett. his wiIe delivered TO him q bond and
mortgage ON certain real estate IN Gowanus to Sc
cure the sum OF $4,O5O, with interest. In August
following Helen Bennett was yet the owner
in lee OF the premises, and the mort
gage was valid lien at the time. during
to Warner, plaintiff being induced by false and
fraudulent representations to give satisfaction
piece or the mortgage. AS part satisfaction War.
conveyed to palntln about eli. hty q res OF
land in Michigan. representing that the land was
worth $500, and ais, gave new mortgage. 1t
subsequently appeared that the Michigan land was
not worth more than $40O The plaIntf now
Is a general denial
Children Gong to Law Over Their Dead
Mothers Properly.
Be- ore Judge Pratt
E. A. Bedell VS.. @. W. BedeL-This is a some
what singular case and presents novel anu i'm
portant question. mother dying lett the greater
part of her property to her daughters. Her sons
seem to have been cut off, One of them by threat
ening TO contest the VIII and produce the certi6-
cate of a physician showing that the mother was
insane, lnuuced one OF his sisters to assign por-
ton OF the property to him. The sister some time
alterward, becoming convinced that she had been
Judge Pratt yesterday rendered the follow ing de-
cislOn in the casc:-
lhS IS an lHpoEuut anu mover cb5e-thiS 1CdOn The
asIs under my
Nor nes e. any ny. to believe she undu
have wish 70 I promoe
ss % e sa no q sr SS
harsh In respect TO the defendant so by statements
y her. s hey w had p he he
hsr eso ee no sns as
IN relat9a to her me.hers will ~ the contrary she
deliberately made assenments tits true She says,
s she ara not read hs or know th contents
which ' at the ma convey n
Sas . s Soassr n
With The relation and condition Of The partes ~ sa
f1 Ss ps sS es q Sens wee re-
had 50 stated anu iha, she would not have
was deceived TO the actual condition her or at
tina! might well her fears The result Of
the a% s SSSla
s ss w but hsS aa a s to
menta to any evidence hal tor this purpose. The
Ine whom Is by
gems % entered ''rH as
e coace Ss tia, OS The trans
made and The proof is Goniradcicd that i had some
na"snS ha ne 9 p. s
TN BY hs assgnmsn mas secured the probate OF her
test it's lost 10 the doendants But his cannot
%hsn sss Induced pa sr s,e @s 1'so 70
The me nd der a. the
mortgages and that an accounting be had before VIM
chester Brit,on, fhe questions to how
est any the defendants shall pay 10 plaintiff,
what any shall be allowed, may be reserved UNI
til tho coming in Of the report
Divorce suit.
Before Judge Tappen.
Mrs. Dunbar brought suit for o limited divorce
from Captain Dunbar. on the grounds Of drunken
ness, abandonment and cruel treatment. The par
ties resided on Clinton street, where, 1t was
charged, the deiennant would occasionally appear,
very drunk, and upset things generally. The case
was sent 70 q reeree, VINO reported In favor oil