The New York herald., 1879-09-10
A CURIOUS CASE.

| A CURIOUS CASE.
SERIOUS CHARGE AGAINST WILLIAM h. MARTIN.
JUDICIAL NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS. FOR RE-
cEIvER GRANTED.
Judge Freedman, of the Superior Court. has just
rendered decision in the suit brought by Catherine
W. Cooke against Nathan c. Platt. William II. Platt
Spencer O. Plat, executors of Nathan q. Platt. de-
ceased; William r. Martin and certain judgment
creditors the facts of which OF great public in
terest The history of the action. which is exceed
ingly complicated, would seem to be as follows:-
! William II. Martin. of the defendants, was for
many years attorney for Nathan G.. Platt,
deceased, who. as long ago 1860. decided his
property in trust. Mr.. Platt further appears,
| involved about that time in suit relating to the
purchase of several lots on Fifty-nnth street and
| Filth avenue. but being then somewhat broken in
health and desirous OF rest in mind and body. ne
concluded to rid himself of this vexatious litigation
With this end in view he, in 1862 assigned his IN
in the property to Kayser. the consdera-
ton being stated at s5o The plaintiff charges,
among other things. that this assignment was in
duced by William II. Platt. of the sons. Upon
tho death of Nathan G. Platt, in 1863 his sons ad
mnstered upon his estate. the property Of the
testator being equally divided by his will
between Mrs. Cooke. daughter. and the
three sons. who were made executors. In this
action Mrs. Cooke begins her complaint by alleging
that Kayser, without consideration. assigned the
Fifth avenue property mentioned above to William
T. Martin. In March. 1862. Charles G. King and
others obtained judgment against Nathan G. Platt
directing latter to fulfil his promise to buy
Fifth avenue property. otherwise the same would
be sold by them. The property subsequently
sold on the I'd of December. 1862. This action of
King was-after tine death Of Mr.. Platt--continued
against his executors. and order for resale
premises obtained. Here a new difficulty
arose, however, and the execution of the order
to resell was rendered impossible by the fact
that city stayed al proceedings and appropriated
Sass. .poo Tor It. It is now charged that William r.
Martin retained out OF this sum $l15369 %,
for The
he divided among the executors. Mrs. Cooke, the
plaintiff. claiming that the estate should have
the benefit OF the entire sum, has brought this
suit for an accounting. She charges that Mar
tin and William II. platt combined to-
which they enabled to do because OF their in
innate knowledge OF the condition of the estate
and the various litigations concerning the
then in progress. Among other, actions was
commenced several years ago by the executors
against George w. fiatr 70 recover nearly th sS1oooo
was employed by the executors to represent them
this litigation under an agreement that he to
receive one-half of the amount recovered. She says
that he has under this agreement received certain
sums from tho Platt estate. half of which he re-
tanned himself aud refused to pay the counsel he
| employed in the
The case came before Judge Freedman. recently.
| on u motion for the appointment OF receiver dur
ing tho pendency of the action and the continuance
of an injunction restraining William Il. Martin and
the executors from interfering with the estate rs
well as to restrain certain Judgment creditors from
selling their judgments until the further order Of
the Court.
Judge Freedman. in his opinion in the case, says:-
"Of the three executors William H. Platt the
condition OF the estate and the progress OF the lt
cations in which it was involved. and he and Will
mutually benefit themselves much possible at
the expense of the estate. Spencer G. P.att and
as a'iar far as the Necessities Of william r. Mar
tin and William ii. Platt required, and
they received only sufficient to keel, them
docile instruments in the hands of their brother
and William r. Martin, and 10 have signed whatever
papers were presented for their signature without
much inquiry or concern. The plaintiff. though en-
Titled to share equally in the estate with the
brothers, never consulted at all. Upon the
whole case cannot hesitate to to the conclu-
sion that not only insolvency exists and conceal
ment and mismanagement have taken place, aud
that such mismanagement is likely to continue, to
the great detriment Of the estate, but also as be-
| tween tho scfepdants William H. Platt and w. r.
Martin a conspiracy exists to unlawfully benefit
themselves ut the expense of the estate, and espe
There in which facts and especially actions
speak louder than words, and the ut the bar
seems to fall within that class. 1t is for this
that cannot attach any Importance to the statements
w. II. Platt and w. Il. Martin denying the exist
cnce of q combination tor the purpose named and
each of them appears contradcted upon several ma
terial points in the by disnterested testimony
and w. Ii. Platt stands contradcted in essential par
ticulars by his oath in the action brough. by
tho executrix against George W. Platt
ACTIONS LOUDER THAN WORDS.
Even the pursued by Mr. Martin the
argument of the motion could not fail to create
unfavorabe impression against him. admitting as
he did by not denying that the assignment OF Kayser
to him was without consideration. and having here
acknowledged the right in the contract of the
recipients of the money including the plaintiff, he
argued and in hisiaihdavit in reply he stated
that the assignment WAS made to him to enable
the executors to share in tho proceeds Of
the property individually and not as execu-
tors This proposition is shocking to the moral
sense of an honest man. The attempt
of William r. Martin to deny his own insolvency
has been completely frustrated by the proofs These
proofs were found to exist among tho records and
upon the files OF the County Clerks Office In view
OF the occurrences well from the inherent
probabilities of the disclosed by the whole
evidence, have deemed it my duty in passing upon
the conflict of testimony, to disregard the state
ments Of william Il. Martin and W. H. Platt far
they stand uncorroborated by other proofs
exceedingly regret than impartial discharge
of duty forces to come to this conclusion, and
regret 1t all the for the that W. II. Mar
tin has been for many years respected member Of
the New York Bar and such enjoyed tho
fdence Of those who were acquainted with him.
But consderat .ons Of sympathy and regret cannot
be permitted to sway the judicial mind against
the evidence or the weight OF evidence. and all
therefore with propriety Is that sincerely wish
that w. H. Martin may, on a final trial, succeed in
making his conduct appear in more favorable
light" Judge Freedman. after stating that tho
plaintiff does not charge anything against the
other executors. goes on to say that "she simply
claims upon this branch Of the that the
actually collected have been improperly spent. ana
that the ability of Mr. Martin to spend her fortune
well as his ability to sell ont the entire Judgment
thinks that the rights OF all concerned would be
safer IL the executors were removed and some one
put in their place OF so high character to forbid
the imputation that he could be used for unwor-
thy purpose. In this entirely agree with her.
In conclusion Judge Freedman continues tho in
junction and grants the motion for receiver.
| -