Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1891-11-09
SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT.
q T. STEVENS, sheriff.
W. S. CHoATE. clerk.
r. A. SMALL, stenogrspher.

W. S. CHoATE. clerk.
r. A. SMALL, stenogrspher.
SATURDAY, Nov
Adams VS. Maine Central Railroad Com
pauY. This case was taken by the jury on
the coming in Of the court this morning,
and after being out about three hours they
returned verdict for the plaintiff for
1896. During the progress OF the trial
plaintiffs counsel, by permission OF the
court, amended his writ by increasing his
claim for damages from $4,000 to Sl2 600
Pbilens Blanchard vs. Silss Blanchard,
1T. & K. A. Carleton for plaintiff, Heath
& Tueli for defendent This is an action
for covenant broken. The plaintiff claims
that she purchased of the defer dent piece
Of real estate In Kansas, tsking from him
warranty deed, but that there turns d out TO
be mortgage on the property OF s4o37'52
which che has had to pay and which sh'
now seeks to recover The defendent says
the property which he conveyed to plaintiff
was in fact held by him ss trustee for her,
and he simply reconveyed what WAS hers.
He says plaintiff and her husband, a
brother to defendant, lived in Wauhegan,
Ill and were aged people; that in Jan
1883, they conveyed all their property,
both real and personsl, to A Blanchard,
second cousin and lawyer, 27 years Of
age aud liviug 10 Kansas City. taking from
him decltra,iln of trust, which recited
that their comfortable support and mainte-
nsrce during their natural lives should be
clsrge upon the property thus conveyed,
which was stated to be 1923 900 more
a. ts,t t4pa In
the family Of A. f, Blanchard in Ksnsss
Citv, where they remained until November
of 80, when trouble arose between the
families, and at the solicitation of PLAINTIFF
husband, defendant went to Kansas City
aod readjus;ment of the matter was at
tempted, plaintiff and her husband de
mauding a return Of their property, and
tae grantee refusing on the ground that he
h.d made some sacrifices to accept the
trust, and had stood by the contrset,
and also that the property had been
Invested so that be could not well
comply with the demand. The matter was
aually adjusted by transfer by warranty
deed Of real estate and an assignment OF
personal property, or collateral Tor It, to
| the defendent, who assumed the trustee
ship, and this, ii is claimed, was with tue
full consent and mutual understanding OF
all parties, the declaration Of trust from A.
L. Blanchard being discharged by plaintiff
and her husbsnd, who lhen came to Winth-
rop to live The defendant says that be
took with this transfer of property the real
estste with the mortgage upon 1t which
plsiotiff now seeks payment for and that
she knew !. was 80 taken bV him. He ssys
that he received from A. Z Blanchard. in
addition to this IS t,u,t property, $1,000 in
cash and note Of A 4. Blsncbsrd's for
$40, 900, paS able in 10 years with interes'
quarterly ut e per cent. secured by two un-
| paid life insurance policies OF s5000 each I;
also received life policy OF $4,000 10 tn
| Msine Benefit to secure the payment OF tha
mortgage TO defendsnt for the payment OF
which this suit is brought. The policies
are on the life of A. + Blanchard. The
| defen5ent says this. he has provided Tor
and maintained plaintiff and her hus6snd
| and sl.o that he has paid over to them 8
| portion Of tbs cssh received by him a.
trustee After the testimony on the pHi
| of the defendant hsd been taken out, the
| iu3ge ruled that In law it constituted no
defence to the action, snd directed ver-
die, for the defendant for the smouu'
claimed The remedy of the plaintiff will
be by bill in equity
Wm. : blanchard and wife VS. Sils'
Blanchard. Same counsel as in previous
case. This action grows ont of the claims
set up in the previous action and is to re.
cover s23. 600 which it 10 claimed be has oil
the plaintiffs property. The plaintiffs claim
that The property was obtained OF them
through fraud. This the defendant denies
and claims that the amount received BY A
r. Blanchard was much less than claimed
By plaintiffs. The defendant was proceed
ing with bis testimony st this time OF ihs
! adjournment at o'clock.