The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1891-11-19

| In 1895, the L. Ht. w. 6 v. railroad com.
pany obtained deed for certain property
and in 1860 the deed was duly filed with
the county recorder. The property in
| question lies south of the 1t. Wayne
tracks, near the old glass works plant.
They occupied only a portion of the land
| specified in their deed, and for years the
city has been in possession of the property
| which In now in question. An alley was
opened making an ineress and egress to
the property and homes of parties whose
lands abut on the alley. BY right of long
possession the city and the property own
| ers claim the land, as the railroad com
| pany fenced IL off from their tracks and
never made any attempt to appropriate II
to their use. AT this late date they have
concluded to regain possession of the
property and have given notice of their
intention to widen their right Of way at
the point mentioned. AT Monday nights
meeting the city council instructed the So
licitor to take the case into court, and the
property owners have joined in the issue.
In the case filed today in the common
pleas court, the following plaintiffs appear
on the title page of the action: The City
OF Canton, John M. Baxter, Mary Lout-
zenheiser, Kate Koenig, Austin Lynch
assignee for the benefit of the creditors of
John f. Blake, George W. Meyer, Celeste
Meyer, Harry c. Meyer, John S. Mel.
bourne.
The defendants are the Pittsburg, 1T.
| Wayne & Chicago Railroad company and
the Pennsylvania company.
The petition sets forth that the city Of
Canton owns an alley running along the
line of John Il. Blake's addition,
and that the defendants claim
that they own this alley. 1t is also stated
that defendants claim they own three feet
along the front of each of the abutting
lots, and 18 feet off the south end and
several feet off the north end of the prop
erty owned by George and Celeste Meyer.
The petition states that the defendant
railroad companies have no right, title or
interest in the property claimed by them
and that their pretended claim consti-
tutes cloud on the title of the plaintiffs.
The plaintiffs state that they are all inter-
ested and joined in the proceedings and
the issue thereof and that the railroad
company is about to tear down a fence
and appropriate the property referred to,to
their own use. They ask that the defend
ant companies be enjoined from in any
way interfering with the plaintiffs peace
able possession of the property, and that
at the final hearing of the case the in
junction may be made perpetual.
They also ask that the alleged title of
the railroad companies to the property be
declared null and void. City Solicitor
Turner, Day, Lynch & Day, Baldwin &c
| p
interested in the case for the plaintiffs.
| A te mporary Injunction has been granted,
pending final hearing.
DECIDED AGAINST THE COUNTY.
The case of Morgan, Moore & Baine
against Joseph Maudru, Treasurer of
Stark county was heard before Judge
Pease in court room No. Il today. Nor
, gan, Moore & Baine are Cleveland firm
who have an Office in Canton, doing bust
/, ness in the coal trade. They returned to
,, , the assessor what was considered a
, very small amount upon which taxes
could be levied, and the Board of Equali-
zation saw fit to investigate the matter.
The result was, that to the tax duplicate
| as already returned by the assessor, there
l was added $1,000. The plaintiffs, Morgan,
Moore and Baine, through their attorney,
I Jud ge A. A. Thayer, obtained tempo
rary injunction restraining the treasurer
from collecting the additional amount.
The c. So was argued by Judge Thayer for
the plaintiffs and Prosecutor G. G. Bow
for the defendant, upon its final hearing
a this mor3ing. Judge Pease in lengthy
opinion decided against the treasurer,
I holding that the Board of Equalization
a failed to place statement of the facts on
me journal, upon which the addition to
the tax list as returned by the assessor
was made. The Injunction was made
: perpetual. Prosecutor Bow at once gave
notice of an appeal, and gave an appeal
bond. The case will be taken at once to
' the circuit court.
n DECIDED AGAINST THE CITY.
/, The case of Joseph Smith OF al against
g the city of Canton ct al was decided yes
terday by Judge Pease. The case grew
out of the improvement in Patterson
h street, the contractors, Turnbull & Com
r pany having failed while the improve
3 ment was in progress. The city had S3iC
q of the money TO be used for the improve
4 ment of that street, on band, and the sub
4 contractors sued for the amount. The
h balance of them received by the decision
y OF the court, the $40 mentioned, Will,
n Smith gets s130 from the city besides
= There 10 some surprise expressed at thu
n outcome of the case.
r, SUIT FOR DAMAGES.
~ John B. Huberty, through his attorne!
Is Nat. C. Mclean, has filed suit agains
p Frank Sheetz. Plaintiff claims that OF
October II he purchased from Sheetz
y certain lot of ground in Canton township
l' in John b. Blake's addition of out lots
p and that Sheetz promised he would opeI
/ a forty foot road, and that said roaC
should intersect at right angles with Siz
teen foot alley. Huberty alleges tina
Sheetz has totally disreGarded the con
tract, and has not opened either the stree
or the alley as agreed upon, and that h
TX has no accc SO to the east line of his prop
b. erty. He claims damages in the sum o
$500.
PROBATE COURT NOTES.