Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1883-10-31

squandering a Fortune in Lawsuits.

The supreme court Of Pennsylvania has just
given decision in a case which has attracted
wide attention. not because of the amount OF
money or legal points involved, but In conse-
quence Of certain romantic circumstances which
preceded it, and the fact that it Is one of about
fifty lawsuits in which one OF the parties has
been either plaintiff or defendant during the
past few years. in nearly every one of which he
has been unsuccessful. This party has singular
passion for litigation. which originated in a law
suit he brought in 1857 and which kept him in
the courts for nearly twenty years. when it was
compromised by the payment to him Of a snug
fortune by the defendants This was the cee-
brated case or Quick against the Wyoming Coal
company. which was tried in the Luzerne county
court.
In 1882 John 3. Quick. of Pike county, Oh
tanned an interest in tract Of wild land in Luz
zerne county. 1t proved to be valuable coal
proper and he transferred his title to it to the
Wyoming coal company. the consideration being
the payment of a royalty on the coal mined. The
contract for some reason was not carried out by
the coal company and Quick attempted to Sc
cure and hold p, session again of the land. He
was finally fOrcibiy elected from the property,
and returned to his Pike county farm. Without
means to take legal measures to recover the
land. he gave up the fight and died. affirming
that the land was his. His son, Peter A. L..
Quick, was the only one Of his large family
who shared his fathers belief and he pur-
chased for nominal sum the interest of his
brothers and sisters in the property. He
lived on a small farm, and operated a primitive
| saw-nlll in the backwOOds of Pike county, the
total proceeds OF his business amounting to but
few hundred dollars year. In 1857 Peter
A. l.. Quick had accumulated $500. With this
In his pocket he walked 90 miles through the
woods to Scranton. then but small place. He
| interested lawyer In his case. and proceedings
were begun to compel the company to acknowl-
edge his claim. which was for 81 900 900. Every
dollar that Quick could get for the next Is years
he spent in prosecuting his claim and, although
his lawyers sold him out four times in 10 years,
he obtained o Judgment in 1867 of $500. 900
against the company. The case was carried to
the supreme court. and there Quick Claims he
was betrayed again by his counsel. and the
Judgment was not sustained. Quick at once
began the fight again, refusing an offer OF
$50. 600 in cash from the company as a compro-
mise After nearly eight years of further litiga-
ton. the company offered him $4,000 in settle.
ment. and circumstances forced him to accept
the offer.
The payment to him of this money was the be-
ginning of new troubles for Quick. His lawyers
attached the money in bank. on claim that il
was due them for services. Quick then employed
the Hon. ID. NJ. Van Auken, asbrewd Pike county
| lawyer, who succeeded in saving $50 QUO for his
client. Van Auken was at that time IN serious
financial difficulties himself. He had been elected
| to Congress in 1865 and the expenses of his can
| vass left him badly in debt. In 1875 when he was
employed by Quick his creditors were pressing
him. He owned a stable Of fine Hambletonan
horses among then being stallion which was
| sired by old HambietOnian. at cost Of 81 600
For this horse Mr.. Van Auken refused an Offer
| of 600 cash when it was five years Old He
subsequently refused to change Tor 20 blOoded
| brood mares and ~ bOoded yearling cOlts. In
| 1875 the horse was valued at $4,000. After Van
Auken's success TN saving three-Quarters OF
Quick fortune from the lawyers. Quick advanced
him money from time to time. and to secure one
OF the amounts took chattel mortgage on the
stallion. Another creditor. ex-senator u. H.
Rowland. also held a chattel mortgage on the
horse. In 1879 Van Auken accidentally learned
that Quick had issued an execution under his
mortgage. and had the horse advertised tor sale.
The stallion was then in service in Central New
York. aud was returning 81 200 year to Van
Auken as his share of the earnings. Van Aukpn
and Rowland went to NewYork state, and sue
seeded in stopping the proceedings. An agree
Inent was then signed by the three that the
horse should not be sold at any time without
the consent of two of the PARTIES. Shortly after
ward, however, Quick returned to New York
state and had the horse sold. the price received
being :l.5OU. Van Auken then brought suit
against Quick to recover damages for the sale
OF the Horse and obtained q Judgment forS4 OOO
The case was carried to the supreme court and
Is the one that has just been decided, the judy
ment t,einu affirmed, with costs.
Ducks mania for litigation keeps him almost
constantly in the Pike county courts. He has had
from one to tour cases on the caieIftier at every
term since 1875 and he has been unsuccessful in
nearly all Of them. 1t is said that he has in this
way used up nearly all of the fortune that re-
suited from his one great lawsuit-a lawsuit
that cost the coal company over 5000, 900 to de-
feud.