The record-union., 1894-10-10
How MRS. WATTS Was DEFRAUDED.
Her Land Obtained From Her By
Deceit.
Judge Prewett's Decision in the Case
Against j. A. Scott and
w. s. Kendall.

Judge Prewett of Placer County has
rendered judgment in favor of Mary Z.
Watts in the suit brought by her against
j. A. Scott and w. S. Kendall of Sacra-
mento.
The action was to annul certain deeds
of trust and promissory notes obtained
from her by Scott Ito whom she was en-
gagged to be married) and Kendall, and
which she alleged were obtained by fraud
and Misrepresentation.
The decision Of Judge Prewett is a
scathing one, and after reciting the facts
brought out III the evidence, he says:
This case presents a remarkable ex-
ample OF credulity upon the part of the
plalntltf and fraud and perfidy on the
part OF Scott her atfianced husband.
1t appears from the evidence that the
plalntln and defendant Scott entered into
contract to marry in about February,
1873, and that while this engagement was
III force he induced her to accompany
him TO Sacramento for the alleged pur-
pose Of seeking employment for her son.
For this alleged purpose they went to
the Office OF defendant, w. 5. Kendall.
Just before reaching the office, Scott
mentioned TO her that he wanted to bor-
row from Kendall a small loan of 500 for
execute to Kendall a mortgage upon GER
tain lands situated IN El Dorado County.
which he, Scott, claimed to have given to
plaintiff short time before. The evil
dence shows that he did not own the
lands and bad not III fact given them to
her.
Not suspecting any trick, she went
with him to kendalns office, where Scott
went through the form of negotiating a
loan of 500 from Kendall. The papers
were then brought out for her to sign. 1t
appears that they had been drawn up and
ready for signatures at least ten days be-
fore this time, thus showing that the
whole matter of the loan was previous
understanding between Scott and Ken
dali.
I'm place. however, of being matter
of a temporary loan of $780, it was in
fact deep laid and cleverly managed
scheme 10 Involve the plaintiff and her
valuable separate property for several
thousand dollars.
I'm place OF mortgage, the papers
turned out to be deed of trust with two
promissory notes, one of which was for
the stipulated sum Of 500 and the other
for $1,000.
The deed of trust, however, provided
that all other Indebtedness due from
Scott to Kendall should be deemed Sc
cured by it, and also that it should stand
as security for such further sums as
should become due from Scott to Ken
dali.
"The greatest feature of the fraud is vet
to be stated. The Ell Dorado lands were
conveyed to her that day by Kendall,
who was the real and only owner of
them, and for which he had shortly be-
fore paid 500. In drawing up the deed
OF trust they included not only the El
Dorado lands, but half a section of the
separate property of the plaintiff, situated
in Placer County, and followed it up with
further sweeping clause that it should
convey all the lands OF the plaintiff,
whether therein described or not.
But the incumbering did not even
stop here. The answer of defendants
shows that short time after these trans
actions Scott executed several other notes
to Kendall for 5000 and smaller sums.
Altogether. they had the property
bound for the sum of 1920. not one
dollar of which went to her benefit.
ut would be travesty upon Justice
for the court to permit these transactions
to stand.
81 am satisfied that defendant Kendall
was at least cogniZant of the acts of Scott.
even If he did not advise them. The con-
tract being obtained by fraud, l do not
think that Kendall should recover even
the 500, for which the plaintiff believed
that she was signing.
LET judgment be entered that the de-
PENDANTS be required TO reconvey the
property to the plaintiff and for her costs
herein"