The Denison review. [volume] (Denison, Iowa) 1867-current, 1911-02-01
SENSATIONAL CASE
PROVES A FARCE
The Famous John PreIl VS. Shaw &
kuehnIe Case Ends With Judg-
nent for Defendants.
JUDGE Does Not Take Time to Hear
Evidence Discussed-UseIess to
Rehearse Facts in Detail.


press a week ago the case of John
Prell versus Leslie NJ. Shaw and Carl
F. Kuehnle was on trial. This case
has been a sensational one from the
beginning. The announcement that
a suit had been brought against the
distinguished defendants came like a
bolt of lightning from a clear sky,
because no one in the community had
anticipated that such an action was
contemplated. The charge against the
defendants that they had conspired
to secure the ownership of a farm Of
100 acres in Morgan township from
the plaintiff without paying adequate
consideration for the same was not
credited by the public generally, and
it was believed the case was
brought to serve some ulterior pur-
pose.
The case was thoroughly tried dur
ing the latter part of the week and
the decision of the court rendered on
Saturday morning. Whatever evidence
the plaintiff offered related to trans
action which, it was alleged, occurred
about fourteen years ago following the
death of John Prells father. The
plaintiff claimed that after the death
of his father, whose estate was in
volved by large Indebtedness, the de-
PENDANTS agreed with him to become
philanthropistS to the extent that they
would save the farm for him and give
it back to him after they had man.
aged, in some way not explained, to
pay off the indebtedness. He was not
able to state just what inducement
was offered the defendants to perform
this act of philanthropy, but to carry
out this purpose he said he decided
the land over to them with the under
standing that he should vacate the
premises and turn the possession over
to them. The evidence showed
that Immediately afterwards he
moved into Woodbury. county,
where he rented farm and lived for
some time, later moving into Ida coun-
ty, where he now lives. He seems to
have been Indifferent to the matter,
claiming nothing beyond writing let
ter to one of the defendants several
years afterwards and asking him
about the farm, and that he received
an answer, but that the letter he lost
and is unable to produce it. He claims
that someone, who is now dead, was
sent to Denison to make some inquiry
about the place. Outside of these
statements of his, he disclosed no eff
fort on his part to claim the land be-
yond speaking to his attorney at Dan
bury about two years ago, when he
says the attorney requested him to
come to Denison and the matter would
be talked over. 1t seems rather pc
culiar that the plaintiff did not come
to Denison until last fall just before
election when his attorney called him
over the phone and asked him to come
down. In answer to the telephone call
he came to Denison and the suit was
started, and almost Immediately
copies of the petition were circulated
throughout the senatorial district
against Mr.. Kuehnle, one of the de-
fendants, who was running on the
ticket for state senator. The plaintiff
rested his case solely on his own testi-
mony, making no effort whatever to
have it corrOborated. The testimony
of the defendants was clear and ex-
plicit, that the transaction which the
plaintiff claimed he had with the de-
PENDANTS never occurred; that no
promise was ever made to him that
the farm should be taken and held by
the defendants and reconveyed to him
at any time; that his fathers estate
was so badly involved in financial
way that the plaintiff could not see
his way to attempt to save the farm
and voluntarily came to the defend |
ants and requested them to save him
some of the personal property in Or
der that he could rent farm else
where and go to farming, which
they did. He sold the land TO
the defendants and gave up the
possession of it and moved away,
and as they said, never once asked
them for an accounting nor to deed |
the land back to him until just before |
the election last fall at the time he
came to Denison at the request of the
telephone message of his attorney. He
then spoke to one of the defendants |
and said he wanted his farm back.