The Manchester journal. [volume] (Manchester, Vt.) 1861-current, 1914-04-16
STATE ~ Vermont,
l}enningtsn County. 81
In Cksncery

vs.
RUBY W. Cook
Amanda L Cook
Whereas, Crosby A. Perry. 81
Reaakboro, Ia lhc County OF Benning.
Ton and State Of Vermont has filed In
the Office Of the undersigned clerk Of
The Court Of Chancsry 10 and for said
County OF Bcnnir gton his hill 81 com.
plant against Rsby VI. Cook f0rmcr.
lly II ManchesttF, in said County and
Amanda l.. Cook o. said Manchester,
therein alleging IN substance that
prior 20 and on The 2nd day Of Dcoem.
Der. 1911. the said Amanda I. Cook
was the owner In possession Of Ger
tain parcel Of real estate In said Man
chester described AS follows: Being
q parcel Of land with dwelling house
and barn standing thereon, in the
village Of Manchester in said Man
chester, lying and being on the cas-,
side Of the highway leading from
Manchester Village TO Manchester
Center. and bounded as follows; Be
ginning % stone post IN the ground,
on the cas-, side Of said highway, at
the northwest corner OF lands Of
Tyrra Ann Gray; thence running
easterly along the line Of said Tyrza
Ann Gray's land twelve rods 20
stone post; thence running norther-
lly along the west line Of lands OF
Nathaniel Towsley, eleven rods and
thirteen feet to lands Of the Charles
Buck estate. thence running westerly
along the south line Of said Bucks
land twelve rods 10 the said highway
thence along the east side of said
highway twelve rods TO the place Of
beginning; with the covenant that
the grantee shall forever build and
maintain the fence along the north
line of said lot, and also the six rods
on the east which is adjacent TO said
north line, which she on
that day conveyed TO the defendant
Ruby W. by her warranty deed duly
executed and recorded in the land re-
cords Of said Manchester; that after
said conveyance had been so made
and recorded, the defendant Ruby w.
by her representations, among others,
| then made, TO the orator, that she,
| Ruby w. was then owner of said
brance Of three thousand dollar
mortgage, and that she had not con-
veyed away the same, and upon which
representations the orator then and
there relied, and he was induced to,
and did, endorse note Of two hun
dred and fifty dollars at the First
National Bank of Bennington for the
sole accommodation and benefit of
the said Ruby and was likewise Undue
ed to loan the said Ruby other sums |
Of money thereafter from time TO
time, aggregating one hundred and |
seventy-five dollars; that said note |
was not paid at maturity by the said |
Ruby W., but the orator discharged |
his liability as such endorser there
on by paying the same and thereupon |
he brought suit against the said Ruby |
on said note and the other unpaid |
loans, in the Bennington County
Court at the June Term, 1912, and
subsequently obtained judgment in
said cause for four hundred and fifty
five dollars and thirty-one cents dam
ages and thirty dollars and fifty cents
$30.50l costs of suit, as appears of
record.
Orator AYERS, on information and
belief, that subsequent to the execu-
ton and delivery of said deed from
the defendants Amanda L. to Ruby /
w., the said Ruby executed deed to
the said Armada l.. of life estate
with reservation and conditions, but
which deed the said Amanda l.. did
not file for record, or cause
to be recorded in the Manches-
ter Town Clerks Office until
aftar haI |
said note and had loaned said sums
to the said Ruby without his having
notice or knowledge Of the existence
of said deed from Ruby w. to Aman-
da L. or the attempted conveyance;
that on or about the goth day of Dec
ember 1914, the defendant Amanda
L. brought her Bill of Complaint in
this Court Of Chancery against this
defendant Ruby w. therein praying,
among other things, that the convey
ance from defendants Amanda l.. to
Ruby w. be declared void, and for a
reconveyance of said premises, but
in which cause said Ruby w. made no
appearance and said Bill was taken
as confessed for want Of appearance
and answer, and such proceedings
were subsequently had therein that
decretal order was made by the Chan
cellor, ordering that decree be en-
tered for oratrix in that cause, ac-
cording to the prayer of the bill and .
that the recording Of certified copy
of said decree in the town clerks Of
fee in said Manchester should have /
the same force and effect as deed
there recorded; that the defendant
Ruby w. now has no real or personal
estate other than that in said bill
that the said Ruby w. has
remained without the jurisdiction of
this Court since some time in May
1912; that the defendants Ruby W.
and Amanda L. both had knowledge
Of all the facts and circumstances
alleged in said bill and wrongfully /
and unlawfully conspired to vest the
title Of said property in said Ruby W.
until after the endorsement and loan :
from orator had been obtained and t
thereafter get said property beyond 9
the reach of creditors, and that said I
Ruby W., the deed from Ruby w. to \
Amanda L. and Withholding the same
from record as above stated, the !
bringing of the bill and proceedings
in said case between these defendants :
were all part of fraudulent scheme I
to defraud the orator and get this I
out OF the reach of process Y
Dv which orators judgment could be q
that the orator had sued =
out his writ Of execution on said
judgment and the same had been lev a
ed by the sheriff Of said County and c
4 certified copy thereof left in the a
.own clerks office at said Manches- Y
.er with his certificate thereon; G
stating that he had been directed to h
evy the same on said real estate and n
hat part Of said premises had been
conveyed away, encountered and was c!
low held in fraud of orators rights \
ind praying that a writ Of subpoena )
Ne issued against each and both OF
aid defendants and that they be re- "a
Iuired to answer said bill, but not
Inder oath, as the oath thereto is ex-
'ressly waived and that defendants
'e ordered to pay or satisfy such exc
ution with interest and costs, or up :,
n the failure Of defendants so to do, r.
L. L. Il. 1