The Nome nugget., 1902-09-24
.$50,OOO
 DAMAGES A Suit Affecting Former
 Nome Man.
DUE T0 MS MOTAER
Caused SepafatIon of Otto R. LOnst0rf anj Wife, Wio
 Now Wants Damages.

The following taken from the Nil waukcc sentinel of Augn,t 26. rc,crs t, q former well known citizen of N0me The sentinel says:
 A claim that Mrs. Margaret T.on,tor of thi, city induced her son, Ojtp t. Lonatolf, to de.ert his wife, ha, ,ci the latter to bring suit against her mother in-law for tln"Gp0 GGmage9. file papers in the suit were filed yesterday in the superior court of MilWut let county, From the prominence of the parties and the amount of dana. claimed. d trial full of sensational tc,ti. mony and unwrittcn family history may be looked fer if the suit ever come, tc trial.
 The principal allegation of the com pIaint i, that after five year, of married life the parties were ~cpcrated and haze lived apart for four years The shit is brought for damages for the anguish which the plaintiff sustained from Eer husband', neglect, The trouble wa- due, Mrs. Lon,torf ~ay.. to her mother in-law's interference. She says that the separation was at last accomplished by thrcat,of di,inhcritancc and an offer of larg" bcque-t if he would comply with his mother, wishes.
 Mrs. Margaret l.on,torf reside, with her son. George II Lou-torf. at 2@Ol Grand avenue. She is reputcd to be worth S2,OOO.00o in her own right. The Lonstort family came here from northern Michigan some years ago and i, largely interested in valuable Minne- ~ota mining rights. Mrs Emma L.n,- tori resides at 63S Third street.
 The plaintif was married to Otto H. Lonetorf in Negauuec, Mich, in July, 1893, and they lived q, husband and wife up to May, lN9S. She alleges that on numerous OrcaSion- before that time Mrs. Margaret Lon>t0rf sought tu iu- ducc her son to leave his wife. bat in vain. Mrs. l.on>torf alleges that hi, mother caused her son to be discharged on numerous occasions from positions, by making derogatOry representations to hi, employ CTS concerning him. mi, treatment had led to hi, being out eff employment for long periods and had renuered it impossible for him to pro- vide properly for his wife.
 The complaint say, that Mrs. Marga- ret l4onstorf repeatedly threatened to disinherit her son if he wOuld net abandon the plaintiff. and made will in which she omitted to make any pro- vision for him, informing him that she had done so.
 It i, alleged that she promised to make him an ample prov ision if he would separate from the plaintiff.
 The complaint continue, that in May. 1898, Otto l.. Lonstorf, by reason c! the pressure brought to bear on him, abandoned his wife and has since then refused to return to her or provide for her. The result has been hat his affcc- ton, have become completely alienated from his wife.
 Sylvester, Schcibcr X Orth are attor- neys for the plaintiff.
 No answer has yet been filed, but im answer to inquiries at the Lonstorf residence it was said that nothing was known there of the suit.
 The LonStorf family has come into especial prominence lately through the favorable decision of d suit for valuable rights in Minnesota. Many years ago the senior Lonstorf. hus- band of Mrs. Margaret Lonstorf, bought some valuable mining property. Liti9a- tion ensued over its possession and the suit was fought through the courts for many years, resulting last summer in q favorable decision for the Lonstorf in. terests. The rights thus secured are at $6,O0O, GOO or more. The elder LoustOrf died before the suit was decided.