The San Francisco call., 1896-07-25
Serious Charges Brought Against
Attorney Outflow and
His Wife.
PECULIAR BUSINESS MOVES.
Transactions That Parted Carpenter
and $500 of His Money in
Four Years

John e. Ciune, who describes himself
as "a carpenter, inexperienced in business
matters" has brought suit against At
torney Fl. W. Outflow and Emma Outflow,
his wife, to recover $s105 %, charging that
he was swindled of that amount by the
defendants.
The complaint states that in the year
1889 Clune was possessed of $500 in money,
a house and lot at 437 Eddy street and
that certain lot of land situated on the
northeast corner of Clement street and
Fourth avenue. He was then a happy,
care-free mechanic, and went about his
work whistling and full of the Joy of simple
existence. But such state of beatitude
was too good to last. Evil days were in
store for the simple-minded carpenter.
In an unlucky hour he became acquainted
with the QuitZows, who at once took a
great in terest in him.
In 1880 Outflow volunteered, so Clune
says, to render any legal services be could
for him, and to give him any such advice
as he might require in the management of
his property and affairs. This interest,
the carpenter now claims, was due to the
fact that the attorney aud his wife were
cognizant of his ownership of the property
named, and conspiracy was formed be-
tween them to cheat and defraud him out
u.
purpose, Clune was invited to make his
home at the residence of the Qultzows, at
915 Eddy street. On March 7, 1890, he did
80, and continued to reside with them for
about four years, at the end of which time
he had parted with all his property.
Clune had no sooner taken up his abode
at 915 Eddy street than it was represented
to him that Attorney Outflow could OBJ
tain large amount of stock OF the River,
Harbor and Canal Dredging and Land
Company, which stock was said to be
worth $40 per SHARE at big discount.
Clune now claims that these representa-
tions were false and that his hosts we'll
knew the stock to be valueless, but never
theless induced him to pay Attorney
Outflow $2805 %, which sum was osten-
sibly to be invested in the gold-produclng
shares of the company with the long, high
sounding title.
In order to raise this money Clune found
avenue and Clement street and to mort
gage the Eddy-street property.
Later Clune says he authorized Quit
Zow to collect the rents derived from the
premises at 427 Eddy street, to pay out of
the proceeds the interest due on the
mortgage thereon and to hold the balance
in trust for him. He now claims he has
never received any of the income.
In 1892 Outflow acted as Clune's at
torney in prosecuting a suit for him in an
Alameda County court. While so engaged,
it is claimed that the attorney induced
his client to invest $500 in the Emigrant
mine by alleging that the mine was worth
$40 900 and could be purchased if a pay
ment of hall that amount be made. Quit
zow was to supply the additional $3100 re-
Quired. Later it was represented to CIune
that the mine had been purchased and
that money was required to work it. Ac-
cordingly he sold the Eddy-street prop
erty and. adding his savings to the pro-
ceeds, says he turned over to Outflow
$3400 to be expended in developing the
mine.
Clune in his complaint alleges that
Outflow never purchased a share of the
stock of the River, Harbor and Canal
Dredging and Land Company for him, but
appropriated the money obtained for that
purpose to his own use. He also claims
that the Emigrant mine is valueless, and
that Outflow so knew, it being assessed in
Shasta County, where ii is situated, for
only $40. Nevertheless, the attorney pur-
chased it, paying $50 cash and giving his
paid for it The $3400 advanced to be used
in developing the mine, Clune says, was
deposited by Outflow, $500 in the Bank
of California and $500 in the London and
San Francisco Bank in his own name.
Therefore, it is claimed that all of the
money paid by Clune to Outflow and wife
was obtained through false ana fraudulent
representations and appropriated to their
own use.
Wherefore, Clune prays that ne be given
| Judgment in the sum of $6105 25, together
with interest thereon and costs of suit.