Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1905-01-12
A Case in Chancery Brought Yes
terday by Certain Heirs.
Injunction Issued by Judge Powers tie.
strnining Il. w. Peck from Using
Estate for Living Expcnses-
Action Grows Out Oe waiver
Eiled by MIR. Peck

fuTtHcr dCtlOu involving inc estate OF
the late Harriet c. Peck of this city was
taken yesterday when a case in chancery
was brought for Jed r. Clark. Joseph u.
Clark and Irene w. A. Clark of Milton
by their guardian. William Odlin. for
Irene Clark Odlin, by her father. William
Odlin. and by Dora G. Odln, against H.
W. Peck and Gardner s. Wainwright and
Sayles Nichols. executors and trustees
under Mrs. peck's will, and other heirs
A long list of allegations are made in
the case, among them being some of a
sensational character.
As result of the case in chancery an
Injunction was issued yesterday by Judge
Powers restraining Mr.. Peck from using
|any part of the principal fund or body Of
the assets OF the estate for his personal
advantage or living expenses and from
disposing of any of the securities. bonds,
stocks or assets of the estate and from
changing the ordinary place of deposit
of any books. papers, vouchers or
memoranda of any kind relating directly
or indirectly to the estate.
When Mrs Peck died she left her en-
tire property, with the exception OF "A
few requests and annunities, in such
way that Mr.. Peck was TO have tho in
como for life and ut his death to revert
10 ncr nelrS. Dl1lCultleS DcIWe"l MT.
Peck and some of the heirs arose and
they finally illuminated in tho filing of a
waiver in probate court by MIR Peck.
whereby he waived his right under the
terms Of the will and said he would take
what the statute allowed husband
This action on his part was opposed BY
some of the heirs and the case in cham
cory followed. Mr.. and Mrs Odlin, who
appear as plaintiffs IN the case reside a.
| Andovcr. Mass.
| The compliments i'll the case alleg"
that Mr.. Peck had no money at the time
of the death of Mrs. Peck and hat since
her death he has lived in a style and at
an expense which exceeds the income de-
| rived from the estate, ana that Ii" has
and is using large sums of the principal.
They ais, say they are informed thai
the estate was valued at over $2noS',
including large sum of money. They al
loec that Mr. Peck means to keep and
treat all of the estate as if it were his
own personal property during his life. ac-
counting to no one therefor
They allcge that Mr. Peck has attempt
ed To sell real estate. contrary to tn"
provisions of the will. They claim that
led =. clark WAS allowed an annuity OF
50 per month and that Mr.. Peck paid th.,
Al
do So.
With reference TO Mr. Wainwright and
Mr. Nichols, the complainants allegc that
they hove neglected and refused to take
possession of the estate to protect the
rights and interests of the heirs but
on the contrary have at all times per
United Mr. Peck to control and manage
lard appropriate 10 his own not only
the entire income but in addition II por-
ton of the principal.
Tho compliments further claim that
Mr. Wainwright and Mr.. Nichols are con
spring with Mr. Peck to the end that
the latter may appropriate to his own use
such portion of the estate as he sees
fat.
1t is set up that tho trustees filed in
probate court bond of 5000, The com.
planants allegc that this bond is the
, only bond executed by any person charged
with tn" management of the estate an.
hat the bond is so drawn and the con
ditions of it SO obscure and uncertain that
70 liability whatever attaches thereundel
10 any of the persons who have signet
:, it.
With reference to the waiver filed b,
Mr.. Peck. the complainants charge tina
by the acts, declarations and utterance.
of Mr.. Peck and by HIS acts Of contro
and management of the property he ha,
estopped himself from making any othe
n election of his rights. as he has attempt
ed to do.
The compliments ask that a master b,