The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1894-08-24
LEFT HER NO WEALTH
MRS. ROSA HINDEL RECEIVED NO
SHARE OF HER HUSBANDS ESTATE.
She Was Promised Much, and Got
NOthing-Directors of Stone Fur
niture Company Sued.

Rosa Hindel yesterday filed suit in the
Circuit Court against William, Edward and
Charles Hindel and John Rauch, their
guardian. The suit is to set aside a deed
alleged to have been executed in fraud
OF the plaintiffs rights in the property con-
veyed. In her complaint Mrs. Hindel, who
is the stepmother of the defendants Of that
name. alleges that in the early part of the
year 1891 William Hindel, the father of the
defendants Hindel, solicited her 10 marry
him. She AYERS that she had for years re-
sided in the same neighborhood in which
the elder Hindel resided and knew that he
was the owner of a large amount of real
estate. Hindel knew that the plaintiff had
knowledge of his wealth, and referred to it
several times in urging his suit. She says
the plaintiff represented to her that ne de-
sired to have some suitable person who
could stand in the relation of mother to his
children, and that his property was ample
to provide a home for her during the re-
mainder of her life. and in the event of his
death during her lifetime her interest in
his estate as his widow would be sufficient
to keep her from want during the remainder
of r life. She AYERS that his solicitations
were kept up during a period of several
mcrths. Eventually she was won and ac-
cepted him as her afianced. From that
tirle on, she says, he informed her of all
his business transactions and his purchases
and improvement Of his property. At the
time of their engagement the unlucky "thir-
tenth was the date set for the marriage.
1t was agreed that they should be married
on June 13, 1898. She alleges that on June
3 the defendant, without her knowledge, eX-
ecuted a deed to the defendants Hindel,
transferring to them all of his real estate,
except a farm In Wayne township valued
at $500. She says the execution of this
deed was, at all times. carefully concealed
from her.
This deed was delivered to John Grosch
In escrow, to be delivered to the defend
ants Hindel at the death of William Hin
del, ST. 1t was also provided that in case
OF the death of Grosch before the decease
or Hindel the deed should be delivered TO
John Rauch, to be held by him in escrow
under the same conditions. 1t was also pro-
Ylded that the deed should not be recorded.
she AYERS. that prior TO their marriage
Hindel had about 5000 in cash. which he
agreed to eXpend in building a home on
North West street to be occupied by them.
After the marriage, she alleges, Hindel rep
resented to her that he believed it would
be best to eXpend the money in making
improvements upon the other property,
which she opposed to be still held in his
name. Upon his representations she con-
scented to the expenditure of the money in
this way. William Hindel, ST., died in April.
1894 The plaintiff alleges that she first
gained knowledge of the transfer at this
time. At the time of his death, she al
leges. his personal estate was valued at
about $500 and his Indebtedness was about
5000. She alleges that the real estate
owned by him and secretly transferred to
the defendants Hindel prior to the mar
riage, with the improvements made upon it
afterwards, was of the value of so. 600. She
asks that the deed be declared null as
against her, and that she be given judg-
ment for an amount equal to the value of
her interest in the estate as widow of the
senior Hindel