Montgomery County sentinel. [volume] (Rockville, Md.) 1855-1974, 1895-11-29
ORDER OF PUBLICATION.
Louis Mackall, Plaintiff,
Paul Urcinolo, Defendant,
In the Circuit Court for Montgomery county.
No. 1851 Equity.

TNHE OBJECT of this suit is to enjoin the
Il defendant Paul Urcin olo, his agents.
servants and employees from continuing to OBJ
struct right-of-way extending from the
| plaintiffs farm in Montgomery county, Mary
land, over the lands Of the defendant and
| Cornelia r. Truesdae 10 a public highway.
That the plaintiff is now and since the
month of November, A. D., 1854, has been
seezed in fee simple of a large and valuable
farm situate in the county of Mon tgomery and
| State of Maryland which is particularly de-
ciibed in deed from Harriet Caroline Mack
all to him, dated the - day Of November,
A. D., 1854, and recorded among the Land
Records of said county in Lioer J. G. H., No.
a, folios 0, &c.
That the defendant is the owner of a par
eel of land situate in said county, adjacent to
the plaintiffs said farm, which is particular
| ly described in deed from George N. Beall
| and wife TO the defendant, dated the 9Th day
of May, A. D., 1895, and recorded among
said Land Records in Liber J A No. 40,
| folio 354
That certain Cornelia Riggs Truesdale is
the owner OF parcel of ground situate in
said county adjacent to the said land of the
| defendant and abutting upon certain public
highway there situate, which land is partc-
ularly described in deed from Alexander
| Burns and wife 10 her, dated the 10Th day of
| December, A. D., 1892, and recorded among
| the Land Records of said county in Liber J
| A, No. SO, folio 1873.
That the plaintiffs agents, servants aud en-
| ployes at all times aud members of plaintiffs
family during portions of each year reside
upon the plaintiffs said farm, that large
portion thereof is under cultivation and that
the plaintiff derives therefrom annually
large amount of oats, corn, rye, vegetables,
dairy products poultry and eggs, large part
of which is sold or consumed by the plain
tiff in the city of Washington and District of
Columbia, and that the plaintiff now has upon
his said farm large amount of the products
thereof which are now ready to be conveyed
to market, and that there are at all times
other valuable products arising from said
farm which are in their nature perishabe and
which, unless promptly conveyed therefrom,
are liable to become total loss to the plain
tiff.
That in the month of November A. D.,
1854, when the plaintiff first acquired title to
bis said farm and long prior thereto there was
and still is way and road leading from the
plaintiff said farm over the lands now owned
by the defendant and the said Truesdale to
and into said public highway which said way
aud road the plaintiff and those under whom
he claims from time immemorial have had
and used and have been accustomed to have
and use for himself and themselves and his
and their servants and agents with horses
and wagons to go and return at his or their
free will and pleasure for the NOR con venient
occupation and enjoyment of his said farm
That on or about the 10th day of October,
A. D., 1885, the defendant closed up the said
way through his said land by telling and
placing large trees across the same and thu
deprived and still continues to deprive the
plaintiff of the use and enjoyment of said
way in any manner.
That by reason of the obstruction and
closing up of said way by the defendant, as
aforesaid, the plaintiff is compelled TO haul
the products Of his said farm to market by a
much longer and more circuitous road by
which he is greatly inconvenienced and sub
| .ected to much trouble, and that the value Of
his said property is greatly deprecated there
by, and that the road he is thus compelled to
| use passes through lands over which he has
no right-of-way except by permission OF the
party renting the same, and that if this per-
mission should al any time be refused, he
| would have no outlet from his said farm and
no means 10 convey the products thereof there
from.
That the plaintiff though he might have q
remedy at law against the defendant for hi.
wrongful act in obstructing said way yet the
same would be attended with great delay ant
would involve a multiplicity of snits for the
sh"c Nuuse VI tcllOu, anu tue utituuhut ne
ing resident Of the District of Columbia
even if the plaintiff should bring an action a
law against him for obstructing said way on
the law side Of this Court il would be impos
siole 10 have process therein served upor
him.
That the plaintiff and defendant reside il
the city of Washington and District of Co
lumbia
1t is thereupon this ninth day of Novem
Der, A D., 1895, ordered by the Circuit Cour
for Montgomery county, in Equity, that tn,
plaintiff, by causing copy Of this order Il
be inserted In some newspaper printed an(
published in said Montgomery county, one
, in each of four successive weeks before tn
seventh day of December, A. D., 1896, Civ
notice 10 the said nou-resi dent defendant
Paul Urcinolo, Of the object and substance O
this bill, and warning him TO appear in thi
| Court, in person or by solicitor, on or befor
the 23d day of December next, to show cause
if any he has, why decree ought not to b
passed as prayed
JAMES ANDERSON, CPk
Circuit Court for Montgomery county.
True copy-Test:
nov.l5-td JAMES ANDERSON, Crk.