The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1902-03-04
HUSBAND MUST PAY
DEAD W|FE'S AL|M0Ny

should have claimed homestead ex-
emptions to protect himself.
Attorneys Welty & Albaugh repre-
sented Merley and w. s. Earsman was
counsel for the company.
JUDGMENT SUSTAINED.
Samuel Dreyer had sued the Cen
trail Savings bank for damages. He
had made a contract with the bank
to purchase piece of property in Can
ton from the bank for $C75 II the bank
should bid It in at shcriff's sale.
When the sale occurred, the price was
run above the amount stipulated, go.
ing up to $500. The bank did not buy
it, and consequently could not tiirn
1t over to Dreyer. The latter then
sued for damages, claiming that he
was damaged In the difference be-
tween what the property sold for and
what his contract called for. The
bank won below and Dreyer appealed
because parole testimony had been ad-
mitted in the hearing. The circuit
court held with the judge below and
affirmed his decision.
Attorneys Clark & Clark represent
ed Dreyer AMI pomereno & Shields
represented the tank.
Owing to the absence OF Attorney
Sterling, the decision in the case of
Daniel F. Mock against Newton X.
Bowman was withheld until Tuesday
morning, when 1t will be handed down.
In the case of w. e. NJ, Hemperly,
VS.. ]. F. Pococf, which had been
heard, Austin Lynch asked and was
granted permission to file a supple
mental pleading instanter. 1t will
come up next week
Court then adjourned until Tuesday
morning Of next week.
ASK NEW TRIAL.
A motion for new trial has been
filed in the case of Daniel Hoffman
against Milton Hoffman. This was
the action brought to recover for care
and nursing of Samuel Hoffman dur
ing his last illness. The jury returned
verdict in favor Of plaintiff for
$1,121.50.
The defendants were not satisfied
with the verdict, and in their motion
for a new trial allege that the court
erred in admitting certain evidence
and rejecting certain things that the
defendants wanted to introduce. 1t
is also claimed that the court in charg-
ing the jury was guilty of error and
was derelect in refusing to charge cer-
tain things that had been demanded.
The verdict is said to have been
against the weight of the testimony.
Attorneys Shields and Pomerene rep
resent the defendants.
PROBATE COURT.
In the estate of Henry Snider, of
Plain township, sale bill has been filed. |
In the guardianship of Harry r.
Mansfield, of Canton. final accolnt has
been filed.
In the guardianship of Paul r. and
Mary r. Section. Of Plain township,
]. Harry Seeton has been appointed
guardian.
In tho estate Of Daniel Baker, of
Sugar Creek township, exceptions to
the first account have been filed
AFTER GUSTAV.
Catherine o. Halter, of Canton, who
recently secured judgment against
Gustav Volzer for $4,000 for breach Of
promise to marry, is making strenuous |
efforts to locate property belonging to
Volzer in order to satisfy the judg- |
ment. An execution was issued on the
9th inst. and delivered to the sheriff, |
who returned it with the Endorsement |
that no property could be found upon
which to levy.
Saturday an application was made |
to the probate court asking an order |
in aid Of execution. The affidavit filed |
by Attorney John T. Blake in the case |
sets forth that it is believed that JOS
eph Volzer and Balbina Volzer have
property in their possession that be- |
longs to Gustav and the court was
asked to order that these parties come |
into court and testify as to the truth |
Of the statement.
Probate Judge Aungst thereupon is |
sued the order prayed for and setting |
the time for March 9Th, when the par
ties are to appear and be examined as |
to any property they may have that
belongs to Gustav Volzer.
TO BREAK ENTAIL.
Elizabeth ]. Loutzenheiser has filed |
a petition In common pleas court ask
ing the court to grant sher authority |
to sell SO acres of land that under her |
husbands will is entailed. The provi-
sions of tho will were that she should |
have life interest in the land, then |
it was to go to her daughter, MRS. |
Mary e. Section, and then to be divided |
among the children of Mrs. Seeton, |
share and share alike.
It is stated that at present the land |
Is used for farming purposes and |
brings little or no revenue. 1t can
be sold to advantage and the proceeds |
Of the sale can be invested to better |
and the court is asked to so |
order. The other heirs are made de- |
In the case, but are acquiesc- |
Ing In the action. II sold, the money |
will have to go into the hands of a |
trustee to be held until the death Of