The Detroit times. [volume] (Detroit, Mich.) 1903-1920, 1908-05-14
JURISDICTION OF
COURT IN EDDY
CASE DENIED
DEFENSE CONTENDS IT'S MATTER
FOR PROBATE AUTHORITIES,
AND RELIES. TOO, ON STATUTE
OF LIMITATIONS.

Argument in the case OF Mrs Caro-
line Eddy against the children OF her
late husband, Charles X. Eddy, OF sag
NAV. has now taken two days In the
United States court, and II is probable
that Judge Swan will take several
more days I'm determining the novel
points raised In this suit TO annul the
will OF the millionaire 'lumberman.
Our entire caset Is predicted on
the claim of fraud" declared Attorney
Alfred Lucking. in beginning the sum
ming up for the complainant, Thurs
day.
Ii Is the plea OF Mrs Eddy's attor-
neys that she would have elected to
take her dover rights In her husband 3
estate rather than the $500 per year
left her under the will. and had she
not trusted Walter s. Eddy son or {.
X. Eddy. and one of the administra-
tors Of the estate. and been Ignorant
of her rights and OF the value OF her
husbands property.
The defense has set up It's defense
mainly on the point that the federal
court has no jurisdiction. Two grounds
are given: First. that the case is a
probate matter and second, that the
attorneys representing Mrs. Eddy are
interested financially with her In the
case. and that she cannot, therefore.
go into federal court. as would be
the case otherwise, she being resident
of another state.
Attorney Watts S. Humphrey. for
the children OF Charles X. Eddy.
argued Wednesday afternoon and
Thursday morning. He dwelt az
length upo nthe statute OF limitations
which gives a widow one year TO elect
that she will take her dover rights
rather than the amount allowed her In
q will.
He asserted that the compliments
case rests solely on her testimony as
TO the alleged fraud and described her
as having been OF sound mind at the
time she signed paper accepting
her husbands will, and able TO retain
lawyers for consultation at that time,
but as having since failed mentally.
Not the complainant, but the attor-
neys and the complainants sons by
her first husband. would profit by a
verdict In her favor, he argued. He
refuted the charge that Lila Eddy
Mills McCurdy conspired with Walter
-. dnu hhthaA 49, W ruNPAi'N 'h~'s
stepmother OF her rights by saying
that Mrs. McCurdy. then the wife OF
Merrill b. Mills. was at that time Ill
and unconscious and that her life
was despaired OF.
There was spirited wrangle
Wednesday afternoon when Attorney
Humphrey read list OF what he
called the undisputed facts Of the case.
Alfred Lucking and Harry Hoffman.
the opposing counsel. objected TO near
~ every statement, and Judge Swan
had to quiet the lawyers at times.
1t was nearly noon Thursday when
Humphrey finished and Alfred Luck
ins began. He asserted that he would
prove the authority OF the federal
court.
I'VE want an early decision" he de-
clared THE complainant is an. old
woman and the statute OF limitations
the other side desires will come when
she closes her eyes"
Judge Swan indicated that he would
like to have the question OF jurisdic-
ton determined before completing
the argument on the other facts Of the
case.
Two sons OF Mrs. Eddy were pres
ent In court during the arguments,
they being the only parties TO the suit
present