St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1889-02-01
VALUABLE PROPERTY.
Merriam Park Acres Involved in
Litigation.


The case of William F. Newell and
John f. Fulton against Cochran &
Walsh and E. A. Holdridge, which was
tried in the district court about year
ago, was decided by Judge Brill yester-
day. At the time of the trial the COM
plainants set forth in their case that on
or about March 26, 1856, they purchased
through Cochran & Walsh, as agents
for the owner, certain property, con-
tanning forty acres, situated be-
tween Hamline and Merriam Park.
$4,000 was paid for the property 10y
the plaintiffs and the defendant Hold
ridge-each to pay third of the cost
and enjoy all equal proportion of the
benefits and profits growing out of the
sale of the same. According to the
terms of the purchase, s17,500 were to
be paid upon the receipt of deed, and
the balance in equal payments. due in
six, twelve, and eighteen months. The
plaintiffs jointly, with the defendant
Holdridge, made the first payment, and
deed was taken in the name of the
plaintiff Newell, who executed notes
and mortgage for the balance. 1t was
claimed that the purchase was made
through Cochran & Walsh, as agents for
the said Ireland. and that HoIdridge
was clerk in their employ. 1t further
charged that Cochran u Walsh adj
vanced Holdridge the money where
with he acted for them in the purchase
of the property. The plaintiffs say that
a short time thereafter the property was
placed under the control of Cochran &
Walsh to be sold. They also claimed
r.
ran & Walsh, concealed from them the
the power to sell, wr0ngfully and un-
lawfully entered into an agreement with
one James P. Moore, whereby the said
Moore should purchase the property
from them at $4,000. The sale was
made and the plaintiffs decided the
property to the said Moore, who,
in turn, decided it to the defendants
Cochran & WalSh--the defendant
Ho.dfidge joining in the deed from the
plaintiffs to Moore. Plaintiffs claimed
that the property was worth S125, 600.
and that motor line which was being
projected upon and across the said
property enhanced its value to that ex-
tent. Plaintiffs were ignorant of this,
which, however. was we'll known to the
defendants. The complaint concluded
with the following petition to the
court: First-That the sale to Moore
be adjudged fraudulent and void.
Second-That as to an undivided two
thirds of the land, said defendants be-
adiudged to have acquired it as trustees
for plaintiff. Third-fhat defendants be
adjudged to account to plaintiffs of and
concerning lands, and that as such ac--
counting they be charged with the high
est market value thereof from time of
such sale down to the time of account
ing, and that plaintiffs have judgment
for amount so due upon accounting.
After a review of the case and many
findings of fact, the court rendered the
following decision: "Plaintiffs are not
entitled to relief against Cochran &
Walsh. That defendant Holdridge
should account to plaintiffs for two
thirds of the price realized by him on
the sale to the syndicate above the NOM
inal amount received by him on SAID
sale by Newell to Moore. Said account
ing may be had at time to be fixed by
the court upon application of either
parties"