The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1900-01-26
WAS TAINTED
WITH USURY
That Is the Allegation Made In
an Answer Filed.
CHARGED TOO MUCH INTEREST,
Claim Made by Defendant In an Action In
Court Another Answer That Claims
Petition Is NIi-Court
House Notes.

Joseph Mock, through his attorney,
c, T. Meyer, has filed an answer in the
case of William D. Kelly as administra-
tor of Mary BONN against Joseph Mock
and John Pfendler. The plaintiffs in
the suit sued Mock for the collection Of
note of 5000. Mock in his answer says
that at the time of giving the note the
plaintiff, in order to evade the stat
utory limitations to the rate of interest
compelled him to pay SIG as interest
on the note of 5000 for the year to come,
in advance. Further, he has been COM
PEELED to pay at this rate ever since.
Under these circumstances he says the
real amount of the principal of the note
was $1S4 instead of 5000 and that the
note is tainted with usury throughout.
He claims that all he owes is $12O.35.
Pfendler was merely surety on the
note.
AN ANSWER FILED.
Attorney Meyer has also filed an an
swer for the defendants in the case
of William G.. Liable VS.. William Dan
nemiller and William Schario of the
Canton Insulator Co. Plaintiff sued for
the collection of bill which he claimed
due for work for the company and for
material furnished. The answer says
the suit should not prevail against the
defendants because it does not make
William p. Ginther a defendant with
them as he was associated with them in
the business and was equally RESPONSE
BILE for what was done.
A RAILROAD CASE.
Judge Taylor and group of attorneys
on Tuesday morning took up a case in
common pleas court to decide who owns
a railroad. The suit was brought by the
Alliance & Northern Railroad company
against the Ohio River & Lake Erie
Railroad company The plaintiff claims
| that the defendant company is, and has
been since 1897, keeping the plaintiff out
of the possession of the stretch of rail-
road running from Alliance southwark
| through Washington and Paris town
ships toward Minerva for a distance of
over ten miles. In the multiplicity of
reorganizations Of the two railroad
| companies and the foreclosure suits
/ brought on the property, both corpora
tions seem to have gotten mixed up and
| both claim this stretch of railroad. The
| defendant company has possession and
| the plaintiff therefore sued to get II
and further to collect 1000 as damages
because the defendant has retained the
property. There are some knotty legal
propositions involved in the matter.
| Attorney Rogers of, Alliance and II
| w. Sanderson represent the plaintifi
and David Fording the defendant.
DIR. YOUNG WON.
Judge McCarty's attention was taker
up Tuesday morning with the hearing
of the case of Angelne Wagner as ad-
ministrator of the estate of ELI Wag.
ner, against f. B. Hane and the Isaac
Harter bank. The plaintiff claimed thai
Hane owed the estate of Eli Wagner
and attached $3.50 belonging to IIant
which was in the bank. DR.. II. e
Young came into court and filed a cross
petition stating that the money in the
bank had been assigned to him by Hant
for medical and surgical attention be-
slowed. The case then resolved itseli
into a contest between DR.. Young anC
the plaintiff. w. j. Piero was attorney
for the plaintiff and ]. W. Craine was
attorney for DR.. Young. After hearing
the testimony the court decided In favor
OF DR.. Young and decreed he should
have the money.