The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1897-08-31
MRS. SrEvENSS LAWSUITS.
FAVORABLE Decisions FoLLoW
THE 6OCIAL LEADERS, DEATH.

16fb bOC1HL ~ Hh'S OhhIDs
During Her Liretiune One Court AFTER Another
save Its verdict Against Her-Now the
Court or Appeals Has Rhicd That MANY
or Her Contentious wero We'll Founded.
Mrs. Paran Stevens was not only noted as o
social leader In this city and Newport, but for
twenty years and up TO the time Of her death In
April, 1895, she was the best known woman In
this country among lawyers and in tho courts.
Almost Immediately after the death Of her hus-
band she began a lawsuit for the construction
Of his will, and this ard controversies which
arose from time to time between herself and the
executors and trustees under tho will gave rise
to a long series Of bitterly contested cases which
lasted beyond her own lifetime. Mrs. Stevens
was defeated in many of these cases in one
court after another, but she never gave up and
was always certain that she was right both in
law and equity.
Wero sho alive now che would have the salts.
faction OF knowing that the highest court OF tho
state agrees With her, for in the last report Of
the Court Of Appeals are to be found decisions
which favor oil of her most important contro-
versies. That this triumph would have been
a source Of great qualification to Mrs. Stevens
no one could doubt who had ever talked with
her regarding her litigations.
She was always sure TINT sho was right, and
hpi Va VIM a. ofPNSahh
her was both vigorous and bitter. Her con-
slant defeats never made her waver in her de-
termination to light, nor did 1t weaken her be-
lief In her cause. Ill success proved to her
only the failure of her lawyer, and the hand.
ing down Of each adverse decision was usually
followed by the dismissal Of the lawyer who
had tried the cause for her and the engaging Of
another. When, on the other hand, Mrs.
Stevens was satisfied with the way In which
her lawyer had presented her case and the find
ings were against her. she would theoretically
dispute the Interpretation Of tho law by the
courts or the findings Of facts by referees.
Paran Stevens died in 1879, Under his will
Mrs. Stevens received 100000 in money and
q trust fund Of 81, 900. 900 was established. Tho
provisions made in the will for the widow were
in lieu Of dover. Tho personal estate left by
Mr.. Stevens amounted to more than 100000,
and included his interest In the Fifth Avenue
Hotel, in the Revere and fremont houses In
Boston, and In the Continental in Philadelphia.
He also owned considerable real estate in this
city and elsewhere. The executors Of the will
were John S. Melchor, the husband OF Mr..
Stevens'B stepdaughter; Charles G.. Stevens Of
Boston, and Mrs. Stevens herself. Tho trus-
tees of the 81. 600. 900 fund were Charles @.
Stevens and George F. Richardson Of Lowell,
Mass.
Mrs. Stevens was intrusted neither with the
| possession nor mo ulhnitk tllcnl OF INC properly.
Its care devolved upon the trustees, and they
could not leave II TO the management Of Mrs.
Stevens. for that was what the testator was
Ssose p With reference to the premises Use, at rs and and
dwelling houses which had been occupied for
many years as residences. They were incun.
bcred with mortp ages to the amount OF 10000
and were valued at Sl50,o00. The houses were
badly out OF repair, and in that condition they
were incapable of yielding n rent SUFFICIENT to
pay the taxes and accruing interest on the mort
Mrs. Stevens took possession OF the lots, and
on the conveyance thereof to her trustees as a
part OF her trust estate she entered into n con.
tract in the name Of herself and the trustees
to erect upon the premises u new building. cor.
Stevens apartment house In went seventh
street. At first the trustees refused to become
10 do so on being Unidentified by Mrs. Stevens
against personal liability, but not the liability
they OF nee nsecessity assumed = as $, Trustees di."Iei MOI % i Inc
biiity for reimbursement OF moneys advanced
by Mrs. Stevens on this account.
that The amount expended by her in construct.
much as added TO the permanent value OF the
premises, should be allowed to her and charged
now says that after a careful examination Of
the authorities, I'VE have reached the conclu.
her claim should have been Flowed. and the
100000 charged to the trust estate
Follewing this dispute raised BY the trustees.
Sin' ' iuihNu ~ oiPA ~ ~.
quiesce in an expense Of nearly S34, 900 which
was charged as SO much paid on account OF the
nillion.dollar trust. This sum was for securing
the foundations Of q wall on Broadway and
Twenty.seventh street, which had been laid on
a muddy bottom. The trustees, in Mrs
Stevens's absence in Europe. called uron the
utors to advance this money which they did
~ nout prejudice to the question upon wha,
rnr les or fund the cost should be charged. The
.,ieree before whom this question went held
that this charge was proper. Mrs. Stevens
stood her ground. but the General Term was OF
opinion that she was wrong. The Court of APP
peals now declares that the costs OF the repairs
must he charged to the executors, and the mil
lon-dollar trust should be relieved therefrom.
There are many other subjects OF dispute
which arose between Mrs. Stevens and the exec
utors and trustees which have now been finally
determined. and although the referee had found
that Mrs. Stevens had not faithfully dis
charged her trust as exccutrix. that she had no
kept up the accounts Of her receipts and dis
bursements, that sho had not taken proper
vouchers for disbursements, that she had pro
noted unnecessary and vexatious litigation
and had insisted upon unjust and unreasonable
claims. that she has made frequent and unex
planned changes OF counsel whereby the trials
Of actions have been greatly prolonged" IN,
final Judgment Epcma tn iugtify her long fight