The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1905-02-22
HANNAH ELIAS BEATS PLATT,
KEEPS THE HOUSES AND THE
fdSH THE Oh n MAN GAVE HER,
HIS snlt In the Att mDt TO Recover $685.
600 Observation-Disclosures Found No
Evidence OF Extortion or Black
, mall-PIatt's Own Testimony Fatal.

600 Observation-Disclosures Found No
Evidence OF Extortion or Black
mall-PIatts Own Testimony Fatal.
Hannah Elias won n complete victory
yesterday when Justice OGorman handed
down a decision in the Supreme Court dis
missing the suit brought against her by
the aged John h. Plat to recover sos5, 3s5
which the octogenarian says he gave her
IN tho course Of the last decade,
Aside from a temporary injunction re-
straining her from using moneys which she
admitted on the witness stand she had re-
ceiyed from Plat. the negress is now I'M
bamperedl illegally in the possession Of the
old mans wealth. Argument on the mo-
ton 10 make the present injunction per-
marent has been delayed pending the de-
ceion Of Justice O'Gorman and now the
Injunction will probably be vacated War
pn. Warren & O'Beirne, Platts counsel,
would not say after they had heard Of the
decision that the case would be appealed
Justice Ottoman says.
For number Of years the plaintiff and
the defendant maintained meretrioious
relations and from time to time during
thi. period the defendant received from
plaintiff now seeks the return thereof, and
bases his right TO recover on the sole ground
Of blackmail and extortion by means Of
threats Of bodily harm and exposure Of
their relations
The case is absolutely without evidence
To sustain this claim; indeed, the plaintiff
asserts that the alleged threats never
Affected him, and admits that he was moved
only by sentiments of affection for the
defendant in giving the money in question.
find no allegation or suggestion in the
complaint that he was an incompetent or
Of impaired mental capacity. nor that the
money was obtained by the exercise of
undue influence,
There is an obvious distinction between
such q contention and the claim made
bv the plaintiff that the money was eX-
torted under threat and duress. The
former implies a voluntary giving, but
under a fraudulent. and controlling influ-
once which. If proved, will avoid the transact
ton, while the latter imports the doing Of
an act under force and oompusion. and
therefore involuntarly. Relief cannot be
grnnted. therefore. on the ground Of undue
influence. 1t is not alleged and conse-
quAntlv is not an issue.
in the framing OF the complaint and the
conduct Of the trial the case has proceeded
upon an entirely different theory Even
II acts Of blackmail and threats Of violence
and exposure may be held competent to
support an allegation Of undue influence,
the specific acts alleged in the complaint
and upon which the plaintiff must rely
for a recovery are not established, and the
grievance complained Of Ia without evidence
to sustain it.
The attempt to establish the averments
OF the complaint az TO the measures en-
i 81 II t..st
having wholly failed, the Court under the
rule that the recovery must be secundum
dllegdtd et probotd, can afford the plaintiff
no relief in the action. The complaint ls
dismissed. but without costs"
Technically, Plat sought TO recover by
requesting the Supreme Court to impress a
trust for the amount which he says he
gave the Elias woman upon several parcels
Of real estate purchased by her out of the
moneys which she received from. him
Washington Brauns, Mrs. Efias's counsel,
when he heard of tho decision, said that it
was Just what they, meaning himself and
eX-Cov. Black, who defended the woman
ut the trial. had expected. 1t meant a com
pete victory for Mrs. Elias. Brauns said.
Soon after he received word Of the decision
Brauns left his Office in Nassau street pre-
sumably to convey the news to his client.
He refused to say anything about her plans
for the future or to tell where she Is living
now A few weeks ago il was said that
she had left her home in Central Park West
and moved into a house in the Bronx.
Plat began his action against the Elias
woman early In June, 1904, when he filed
at the County Clerks Office lis psndens
on her property and his complaint in the
Supreme Court. Later he obtained a
temporary injunction restraining her from
drawing any moneys from the banks and
from collecting any rent on property which
be alleged had been bought with money
given to her by him. A receiver also was
appointed to take charge of her property
pending the trial Of the suit, Mrs. Elias
being allowed $500 a month. On Feb II
the Appellate Division set aside the in
junction on the ground that no evidence
had been adduced TO support Platt's allega-
tons Then the temporary injunction now
In force was obtained on evidence given
by Mrs Elias herself at the trial The
criminal proceedings, which we're dismissed
by Magistrate Ommen, we're of course
entirely independent OF the action dis
missed by the present decision.
An argument was to have been heard
before Justice Trla1 in the Supreme Court
yesterday relating TO the Platt-Elias case
but It was adjourned sine die by consent
OF the lawyers. This motion, made by
Lawyer Warren. Platt's counsel. was that
Washington Brauns, the Elias woman's
original counsel should be adjudged in
contempt for an alleged paying out of
money on behalf of his client after he had
b-en served with an Injunction In the case.