The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1900-07-13
THAT VAN STORCH CASE.
In Some Respects It Was One Of the
Most Remarkable Ever Tried
in This County.

The case of William Won Storch
against burlington Won Storch, in
which the judgment in favor of the
plaintiff was affirmed by the supreme
court as told in the Associated Press
despatch published in yesterdays
Tribune, had several features that
made it remarkable.
In the first place 1t broke the record
for LackaWanna county in the matter
of the time consumed in its trial. 1t
was called June Z, 1897, and, with a
few Interruptions of n day or two at
time, continued for twenty-one days.
Judge Archibald presided and some of
the most prominent attorneys of the
two counties participated, eX-Judge II.
A. Knapp, Major Everett Warren John
i. Scragg and Alex. Farnham, repre-
senting the plaintiff, and Jessup &
Jessup, O'Brien e. Kelly and II. c.
Umstead, the defendant.
Another of its features was that the
property over which there was such an
expensive dispute was of comparative
ly small value, being simply an old
dwelling and the surface OF two-thirdS
of an acre of land. It is located on
North Main avenue, near where the
office Of the Providence Gas and Water
company stood for so many years, and
was commonly known as the Arcade
property.
The plaintiff claimed it in fee simple.
The defendant, who is his nephew,
claimed 1t as an heir of his father,
and further by squattar sovereignty,
alleging adverse possession for thirty
years. The uncle admitted the possess
ct 1N,,t 1,,Jl
tenant under him. The defendants
claim that no rent was paid or even
demanded was met by the plaintiff
with the allegation that free tenancy
was allowed because of their kinship
and like considerations.
The land was originally owned by
Edward Hermans. Ferdinand Won
Storch, brother of the plaintiff and
father of the defendant, bought tt in
1S47, and was in possession until 1869
In 1866 Ferdinand conveyed the
equitable title to Abel Bennett OF
Binghamton, n. Y, close personal
friend of the family, certain circum-
stances making it eXpedient to put
the property in an outside party's
hands.
In 1868 the heirs or most of them
Joined in a request to have Bennett
convey the trust property to William
and Godfrey Won Storch. Others of
the heirs asked to have it transferred
to William alone. Bennett conveyed
it to William in fee simple, eX-Judge
Garrick NJ. Harding acting as the at
torney.
The defendant, at the time, claimed
that while the conveyance was in fee,
a secret trust was established, and eX-
Judge Harding took the stand and tes-
tifeG that such was his recollection Of
the matter. The jury, however, found
that It was not trust deed, but deed
in fee and this finding Is now affirmed
by the supreme court.
There were numerous lateral fea-
| lures TO the case to strengthen the
contentious On either side. \ score of
witresses We're called or the matter of
| the character of Currington's possess
| sion. Many OF these were the Oldest
| of the North End residents. Some
| held that burlington had always act
| ed as If he was the owner of the prop
| erty, while others told of various acts
on the part of William, such as the
making of repairs and the like, that
| tended to show he was the owner
The costs OF the suit, II is safe to
say, amounted to almost the value of
the prop perty in dispute.