The Barre daily times. (Barre, Vt.) 1897-1959, 1913-10-15
Wetmore & Morse Co. Sues
Executrix of the Harry
Bertoli Estate
INADEQUATE PRICE
IS THEIR ASSERTION
Plaintiff Company Says 1t
Was Deprived of It's
Rightful Share

Washington county cases are being
taken up in Vermont supreme court at
Montpelier Arguments were completed
yesterday in the suit of Nora Adams vs..
| Charles w. Averill of Barre for damages
because of being struck by the defend
ants automobile, and the case rests with
| the court. r. A. Hoar and j. Ward
Carver appeared for the plaintiff and S.
Hollister Jackson for the defendant.
| After that the case of the Wetmore g.
Morse Co. vs. Maria H. Bertoli exeeutrix,
was taken up, f. NJ Harvey appearing
for the plaintiff. j. w. Gordon for the
defendant and S. Hollister jackson for
Lowe & Mercer. The plaintiff claimed
that it was creditor of Harry Bertoli
at the time OF his death and that on
his death Mrs. Bertoli, having been ap-
pointed. disposed of the property in
Montpelier for an inadequate price, thus
depriving the company of its just share.
In presenting the defendants side, At
torney Gordon asserted that the case was
one entirely within the jurisdiction of
the probate court and could be settled
there in satisfactory manner. He also
asserted that if the executrix had not
carried out her duties properly it was
within the probate courts right to re-
move her and appoint some one else.
Attorney Harvey stated that the man,
insolvent at his death, had tried to bind
over his property for disposal in man
ner prohibited by the law in the case of
living man; also, that the executrix,
his wife, had undertaken to settle the
estate without advice from court or at
-. L.. - h. ,ts-,xy hoI
given lease of the property for three
years, knowing that under the provisions
of the viii the property had to be sold
to satisfy creditors.
For his clients, Attorney Jackson said
that the creditors had allowed the mat
ter to run along for a whole year be-
fore bringing this action, that no steps
had been taken for the removal of Mrs.
Bertoli as the executrix, that there was
no reason for her to sell the property.
The court took the case under advise
ment.
An Interesting Will Problem.
The case of Ivan A. Sparrow vs.
Charles A. Watson was argued, it being
on a petition for the division of certain
property in Calais. The case deals with
the right of an heir to deed property
left by will, which stipulated how the
property should go. The Hathaway
property was in question, Mr.. Hathaway
willing IL shares of his property to his
wife. 10 shares to one daughter, Emma
j. Watson and eight shares 10 another
daughter, Mary Jane Jacobs, with the
further stipulation that on the death
of Mrs Hathaway her shares should be
divided equally between the two daugh
ters. six shares each, and that on the
death of the daughters, their shares
should be divided equally among their
children.
Mrs Jacobs decided part OF her prop
erty TO Mr.. Sparrow and upon her death |
the question of the validity of the deed |
in view of the terms of the will was /
raised. Fred L. Laird argued the case
for the plaintiff and f. NJ. Harvey for
the defendant
In the case of Charles Frattini vs. |
Louis Spinelh. ct al, trespass, Attorney |
Hoar, appearing for the plaintiff, sub |
mitted his brief. The cases of First /
banks VS.. Bertoli and Nicholas
Locasso VS.. Jones Bros. Co., were con
tinued. as was the case of Waitsield VS..
The case of A. Bondi VS.. James Mack
ay. city clerk of Barre, was argued this
r. A. Hoar appearing for the
plaintiff and H. b. Shaw of Burlington
the state of Vermont. The
state was called into the case because
Of the fact that the matter at issue is
the question Of the legality of the non
resident hunters license