The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1915-11-16
SAYS WRIGHT GOT
100000 FOR PLANT
Lawyer Williamson Now
Wants $4,000 for Handling
the Negotiations.
DETAILS OF AIRSHIP DEAL

orvllle Wright received $500, 900 and
a contract for his employment at $25,
900 a year for his stock In the Wright
Aeroplane Company. recently sold TO n
new syndicate These figures were made
known yesterday when Pliny W. WILL
hanson Of 1I5 Broadway, legal and
business adviser Of the Wright Bros
filed suit against Mr.. Wright TO recover
$4,000 for his services in effecting the
sale.
On the application OF Williamson an
attachment against wright's properly
In New York was granted by supreme
Court Justice u.esertch ON the ground
that Wrisht Is n resident Of Dayton.
Ohio. Sheriff Grifenhagen will serve the
attachment to-day against such properly
of Wrisht's as can he found
Williamson says tl,at In May, 1914.
Wright owned 1850 shares. or 81 per
9 OF the wright company's stock. "a
New York operation. Williamson
alleges that the business Of the wright
company had fallen of 80 materially
that II wa 20 longer successful. and the
health ot tho defendant (Orvillc WrighD
had become impaired" Accordingly
Wright expressed a desire TO cell his
stock and he relieved OF all business
responsibility in connection with II. To
that end he requested Williamson TO
act " his agent or broker In negotiating
the sale OF his stock and to sec nat he
the new ownership.
TIE plaintiff charges that his comp-n
sat.on Tor effcct!ng the sale OF tho de-
PENDANTS interest WAS 70 he on a
contingency basis ard that he was 20
receive n '.tust and reasonable remuncra-
ton for his services"
Williamson Gays that ne took up the
matter with Frederick 7. Robertson.
president OF the International Metals
Selling Company. and Philip W. Russell.
q lawyer. He said that az a result OF a
reror, he made 20 Wright Robertson n
Russell wen. to Dayton or August 20
and - last and with Wrish, and WILL
.a.rson carried on negotiations for the
sale OF tho formers stock
The pia,nt..f says that the parties in
tercsted finally came 20 an understand
ing az 10 terms. but prior to tf!s time
Il had been agreed hy Wright that
$4,000 would he n cair remuneration 10
Williamson. lie aid that after tho
trade was arranged Wright dissenttd
from the agreement. Williamson ther
undertook; TO obtain a more blc
price for the Wright stock. as "a Iesnl;
OF which Wright would receive "a .arRcr
MONT end the plaintiff was TO collie.
sis $50, 900 tee. The deal was closed on
October u last ard Wright received the
amount 10 which lie was entitled under
tho contract. Williamson claims tina;
no was engaged III the negotiations
seventeen months and during this time
incurred large expense. FOR thus reason
10 believes tina. $4,000 IS a reasonable
return for his efforts. Wright got $3.50
Geo In cash. OF which $4,000 was paid
Angus. - ,tst and s2?j.O0 on October
Il for his stock. according 10 William
son. In addition D." look a fist mort
sage for t2Jo.0oo ~ the company
property. payable half Of October l..
1916. and The remainder on October IL,
1917 lie AGO BEGAN. consulting err
ciLcer' 81 $4,000 "A year AMI was re-
l!sycd 81 all prior Obligations 10 the
company.