The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1900-01-30
FOUR SIDES TO
THE CONTROVERSY.
Priority Of Liens a Feature In
the Lawsuit.
A NEW TRIAL WAS DENIED
In Case Heard Before Judge Taylor
Springer Case Finished--A Par
tition Case. Court House

Judge McCarty took up the trial Of the
case of Peter ]. Frank VS.. John Bur-
senowski ct al. Friday morning. This
case has developed in to sided
controversy. The sheriff has just re-
ceived an order to sell one property for
the defendant in Jackson township on
judgment of $3.50 and the place has
been appraised at $11OO. In the suit in
court Friday four parties are claiming
priority of liens. Bursenowslki is rep
resented by w. j. Piero Frank by 7. ).
Smith and the Workingmen's Building
and Loan association by p. ]. Collins.
The controversy is to see whose money
is to come out first.
NEW TRIAL REFUSED.
Judge Taylor Friday morning heard
the motion for new trial in the case
of Dunkerly VS.. the Canton Iron Foun-
dry Co. Attorney Pomerene represent
ed the defendant company which was
worsted IN the former suit and Mr. Bow
stood for the interests of Dunkerly.
The court found no reason to disturb the
VI lllt lSI llleil ctlli lCLuSSI
other chance.
SPRINGER CASE.
Judge Taylor finished the case of
Springer Bros against John Y. Will
lams ct al. Thursday evening. All the
witnesses were examined and both si1es
given a full hearing. The attorneys
then decided they would not argue the
matter but would submit the case on
briefs. The wife of Williams testified
that she had paid for the property with
money she earned teaching school and
with some she got from home and that
her husband had no interest in it what
ever. The Springer Bros. claim was
for lumber furnished in the building of
a house.
PARTITION CASE.
Helen Thomas has brought suit
through her attorney, Allen Cook,
against Rose Anne Haynes and other
heirs of Elizabeth Philippi for the par
tition of the property left by the latter.
The estate consists of parts of lots 792
and $50 in the city of Canton.
COMPLICATED CASE.
Judge Taylor Friday morning dismiss
ed the case of Criswell VS. Sheriff Zaiser
upon the request of Attorney Werntz
for plaintiff. In this case Harrison
Criswell was the administrator of the
estate of John Criswell. He used up a
lot of money of the estate and his
bondsmen had to make it good. Frank
Criswell got personal judgment for
5000 against Harrison. Harrison could
not pay it. Then partition proceeding
came into court and the sheriff got lot
of money in his hands belonging to
Harrison. Frank sued and attached the
money. 1t developed that Harrisons
share would not be more than enough
to repay his bondsmen for what they
had to pay out for him and Frank be-
gan to look elsewhere for his 5000. While
administrator, Harrison had paid his
other brother, Joshua, $137 more than
his share, and Attorney Werntz went to
Harrison and got him to assign his
chance to get this back to Frank for
the 5000 judgment. This being done,
Joshua's share in the sheriff's hands
was attached by proceedings in Justice
Bowman's court on Thursday evening
The other case was therefore dismissed
Friday morning.
PASSED THE CASE.
The lawsuit of Grouse VS. Stripe, which
was assigned for trial before Judge
Taylor this week, has been passed. In
this controversy George Grouse, of Ak
ron, claims certain interests in lands
and brickyards operated by the Stripe
brothers. An effort is being made to
settle the issues out of court. Attorney
Shields is in Akron today trying to ad-
just matters.