New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1904-06-21
CLIENT SUED BARNABY.
Fraud Charges Against Him Upheld in 1900

According the record in The l. W Journal
of December. 1900 Frank \. Barnaby was with
others sued for fraud. the charges rising out OF
Barnaby's dealings with client In the periodical
mentioned and under the caption Decisions SUI
preme Court. Special Term Kings County" ap-
pears the following: BY Mattice, J.; Healy VS..
Observation-Disclosures for plaintiff. See opinion In
the opinion Justice Mattice wrote:
I am convinced thai the final division of what
ma M he 9T9pfT b 5STs the sPo Was the reward
participation in Earnabys frauds.
The suit was brought by James r. Healy. OF
Brooklyn. against Rernaby (who he'd at that time
a real estate branch office in Brooklyn G. G. and
W. e. Martin and James W. Golden 10 recover
seven parcels Of real estate valued at $4,000 The
facts. as reviewed in Justice Mattice's opinion.
follow:
ON January 9 1899. the plaintiff made Barnaoy
his agent for the purpose Of buying real estate at
formed the plaintiff that William Reed tho
owner of the property, and wanted Sl0OoO for il,
land belonging the plaintiff in Brooklyn. As
matter Of fact. Raruaby had not personally
Red. the plaintiff examined the property and In
structed Rarnahy To conclude negotiations.
on January g. 1899 the Martins purchased the
Fifth ave. property through brokers for S250GG1.
The contract and sale we're made in the name OF
John c. Schawve. dummy for the Martins. At
the time or the execution OF the contract the
Martins paid Mr. Reed $4,000. and agreed 10 pay
the balance March 10, 1899.
Healy took possession OF the Tifth-ave. property.
and collected rents through Earnaby until August.
1899. when he discovered that Reed had not got
Barnaby. and brought action. charging that Bar
naby and the Martins had Conspred defraud
him.
Continuing Justice Mattice seid that by January
% the plaintiff had made over the deeds OF the
seven parcels OF property to James w Golden
and had delivered them Barnaby. who had told
him that he Reeds private secretary. Healey
got deeds for the Fifth-ave property and then
executed two mortgages. for 500 coo. to the
Lawyers Mortgage Insurance Company and one
for $4,000 to the wife OF Barnaby. In declaring that
plaintiff was entitled To Judgment. with costs and
an extra allowance. the Court said:
II does not appear. and may never appear how
much the Martins knew Of participated In Bar
naby's fraud. and it is necessary 20 inquira
into II. The Very fact of this division. whereby
Barnaby gets property amounting more than
$4,000. convinced me that the Martins knew The
agent was practising gigantic fraud upon his
principal. convinced that the final dispose
ton of what may be properly termed the spoiIs
the reward the Martins received for active
participation in Barnabys frauds.
The settled by the payment OF q GER
tain of money to Mr. Healy. General Benja-
min +. Tracy counsel for the plaintiff IIeaIy
Mr.. Healys attorney would have been likely to
remember more about the case than am General
Tracy told Tribune reporter yesterday "but I
believe he is not now living. 50 far my recoIec-
ton goes the facts were substantially stated