Ellsworth American. [volume] (Ellsworth, Me.) 1855-current, 1902-03-26
MISS TRIBoU WINS.
Decision Of Law Court In Interesting
Hancock County Case.

in Hancock county.
The case was one OF unusual interest,
and Involved property to the value OF
$4,000.
The plaintiff was Miss Marcia II. Tribou,
of New York, and the respondent, Capt.
Frederick c. Tribou, OF South Paris, Sic.
/ Miss Tribou asked to have certain deeds
to real and personal property. made by
her to the respondent, set sside on the
ground that she was unduly influenced by
false representation and fraud, to sign the
papers.
The complainant 10 the granddaug hter
OF the late siIas X. Tribou, OF Bucksport.
who died In 1899, leaving sn estate which
the inventory shows to be worth $50 900,
about IS coo of which is in real estate ana
The balance in bonds and securities.
siiss X. Tribou bad three children
Charles H., the father Of the complainant
in this case, Frederick c., the respondent,
and Rebecca, who lives with her brother
ia South Paris. BY the will of silss X.
| Tribou, executed in 1857, the property
was about equally divided among bis three
children. Charles, however, the father OF
the complainant, died before bis father.
and the daughter, the sole heir, came into
the estate OF her father under her grand
| fathers will. The respondent, however,
claims that there was a codicil to the will
| by which the share Of Charles II. would
revert nj his death to Frederick G. and
Rsbeccs.
Soon after the death OF her grandfather.
Miss Tribou's uncle invited her to visit
MIN at his home in South Paris, which
she did, remaining there about ten days.
1t was during this visit, she alleges,
that her uncle induced her, by misrepre-
| semtation and duress, to sign away all her
right, title and Interest Ia her grand
fathers estate, and to give him q quit
claimed deed OF the same for $1,000, or
about one half what the complainant now
al,syes m n. har xhar. ~ ,ha .u,s,.
IT, 49,, =, -
W. ~ ''
80
]. Was the complainant induced or compelled
by undue influence. duress, fraud. fraudulent
misrepresentation or fraadulen, coneeslmsnt
upon the part Of the respondent 70 execute and
deliver to the respondent the deed and bill Of
NNs~ =. 49, fs"sANN@ Stb*
2. Were said, deed and hiii Of sale given
without consideration, or was the consideration.
IL any, for said Instruments, 20 grossly made
quAle under all the circumstance that the same
should not be regarded by court OF equity. in
accordance with the Instructions given. az
valid consideration for the sransaesiong
To both questions the Jury auswered
.yesn The ntai,,iY uss rsrra.a,,,., ~
-
q t-,1 A"u 'he
VI DueKspoft'
ihe IA" eou's Ainims the oieision oil the
lower court, Win additional costs for
plaintiff. The rescrtpt, by Justice Pea
body, Is as follows:
Marcia y. Tytbon Va rroa,r,e. :, r~,,...
Tina ,vss a hrl In s,,,,,. % ,.ht.h, 49,. .,-,..a
.skea ths, the ae.a nnd ran =, -. - -
her q, the defendant ha an,,,,,,., ~, ..,,.,;,
on the ground tins, shs x.. ,,,d,,,e,, - -
IN. ,ns,,,rnan, he a,,r..s 49,, -,
I, e.r,e hetor.s ~, H.. -. -. 49,,
tn. aetsnf,sr, from, tho .s,,so =, =, ~,.~,~ -
,,re rorarr,tns the ,.r,s 60, a.. ~. -.
,,,.tar ,.s,as .r.,..,.,, - 5000, - 49,
the ron,, rh., ,he rl.,r,t,r -. -, - ~
1870, b., $50 a., - So.
~ e,srn.e The deed ana nm y, -. -,
g., H., h,,l -, .,r,,,.t,,, -,
or.,, c,,s,ssvs,,nr "a -. !. -D'oe'
der.c .,tT,a.e,, s,,, ,,s.,a.,, -, = VI
M, -, -. -, a., -, 'le 100 "'"
.,,.s,,,., ~, s,r,,I,,., a., a., s "
1910, 49,, ,a,,r., 80 ~. 1900,
-, -. 'Ss,,.', ~, :, '1N'eeh'
a. d, a.. anu
-, ,.,..'',s.'. - p"''e' 10 DC
r. .,s,..s,,.s - 44-1 "nen's'
,,on vs. ,.,t,a, t,or, 49,, "a, p, =. t-'
go sur. y .r-,,..-. -, "si sia."
s,,.s.,s,,s,, ,, ~, -, "
,sa r.s,,,,a q, re go -, =. -, "
- s..s-- c,-~,s. ~ " sA W" :"
-, -. -. - 1919 ""V '@" Nv
n,~,o,,r 49,, 40 I.a,,,. iue
mr.. 90 .,,o,,n, 90 No., .r.,,.a,,'-s,' y. .''e 20
- =, 49,, -, =, - - - tvpS
,.,,,.., -. 49,, - -, 'as We
- - :, -, 80 49, safs "ni
80 ,,,,... - ia, -. = - ''.. .'s
..,.,.... = 'et t'ie