Los Angeles daily herald., 1890-01-03
| CELEBRATED CASE.
Mrs. ColtOn's Suit Against
Stanford ct al.
HISTORY OF THE LITIGATION
The Supreme Court Affirms the Judg-
ment in Favor of De-
fendants.
/ Associated Press DISPATCHES to the HERALD.

Associated Press DISPATCHES to the HERALD.
SAN Francisco, January 2.-The cast
of MRS. d. o. Cotton against Lelant
Stanford, G. P. Huntington and others
which attracted much public attention
during it's trial before the Superior Cour
several years ago, was decided by the
Supreme Court today in favor of the de-
fendante.
General D. o. Cotton was formerly
associated with Sta nford and others in
the ownership of the Central Pacific
railroad and number of other extensive
enterprises, involving many millions of
dollars of capital. General Cotton died
in October, 1878, and about year
later settlement was made between Mrs.
Cotton and the parties who had been
associated with her husband in the rail.
road enterprises. An agreement was
signed by all parties at the time the set.
tlement was made, but about two years
afterwards Mrs. Cotton claimed to have
discovered many errors in the calcula-
tions upon which the agreement had
been based, and in May, 1882, she com.
menced suit against Stanford and others
for the rescission of the agreement. on
the ground that it had been procured
through false and fraudulent representa-
tions. The defendants, in their answer,
denied the charges of fraud, and averred
that Cotton, during his association with
them, had fraudulently appropriated to
his own use large sums of money belong
ing to defendants.
After a trial lasting nearly two years,
judgment was rendered in favor of de-
PENDANTS. From this judgment Mrs.
Cotton appealed. The decision of the
Supreme Court today affirms the judg.
ment of the lower court and denies the
motion for new trial.
In passing upon the points raised by
plaintiff on the motion for a new trial,
the Supreme Court follows closely the
reasonings and findings of Judge Tenn
pie. In fact that jurist's decision is sus-
tanned at every point. 1t is affirmed
that Stanford, Huntington, Hopkins and
Cotton were not partners in legal sense,
but that their relations ss railroad build
ers and managers of corporations were
Off confidential and fiduciary character
only. The death of Cotton dissolved
these trust relations within the meaning
of the code, and Mrs. Cotton only sue.
ceeded to his interests. She did not and
could not have succeeded to the relations
which her husband bore to the railroad
magnates. AS a matter of fact she did
not depend on their statement of the
condition of her husbands affairs, but
she called in Samuel w. Wilson, q
distinguished lawyer, and Lloyd Tevis,
skillful financier, to procure settlement.
They expended six months ia examining
Colton's affairs, and finally succeeded in
effecting a compromise which Mrs.
Cotton accepted, and with her eyes open
and by the advice of her. advisers,
signed.
The Court positively refuses, as did
Judge Temple, to rescind the agreement
made in this way, either on legal or
equitable grounds. The opinion states
that plaintiff does not show that any
fraud was psrpetrated upon her; on the
contrary, every facility for examining
into the accounts of the railroad corpora.
tons managed by the deceased, was
offered her agents. The Court finds |
nothing else, either in law or evidence,
upon which to grant new trial.