New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1915-01-17
o.;ch Wins 24-Year Stuff
Over Hotel Against
Cochran Estate, :
c,SF GREW OUT OF
LOAN OF $4,000
u.;r> of Workers Philanthropist
vo>t Account for Profits of
Many Years.

-. Lorcaz Reich may receive some
. ,se 100000 from the estate Of
-, $ Cochran, who was a mem
WI che family % carpet manu-
F &C., Of NoDkcrs and philan-
a.g s..-or was brought against
H. Who died iu 1902. Il was CON
GO s~sir,t Alexander :. Cochran,
a.. executor Of The estate.
M man who thus Will receive tins
IN. csuD TO this country from
g-.-sry poor immigrant. What he
80 In money. however, he possessed
',-~sI.ses that have stood him IN
.tesd IN his fight of quarter of
s'.o--rturv against thC financially pow
"p.,,, went into the wine business
zoo, was able 90 build a hotel.
~ hotel. located az the southwest
..~ of Fifth av. and SD St, op-
80 where the Waldorf-Astoria now
49, became known as the Cam
80. and was the rendezvous Of some
- most noted men Of that time.
y, ,roperty was owned by the AstorS.
~ having sufficient money TO buy
ps;eh rented II for term Of five
s+ sos. 900 a wear, with the under
-i;Dc that should he erect a build
80 cost $4,000 during the term of
- Lease ne was TO have al extension
.s..oer wears. IL was further agreed
~. Surinc the next twenty years he
- turr back the lease for 100000,
- rsid bv the AstOrs. or obtain an
-, renewal by paying as rent per
-, m the value Of the building.
Drove Hard Bargain.
william s. Cochran came into the
- ,isr when Reich. Of whom he had
-, friend. required $4,000 10
- ont the erection Of a hotel 10
80, $500 900. Cochran was liberal in
y. contributions 20 charity. but was
how'd in business matters, and drove
one hard bargains.
h lent Reich the money, but the
h.,er hsd % agree 20 pay back S2l5,-
M Tor the $4,000 loan. Also Reich
Ia 70 turn over 20 Cochran as secur-
h his lease on the Fifth av. site.
Tisr Cochran sub-leased the property
!, Reich. and also obtained from him
,.,sipt for payment Of a fveyear lease
~ spsrtment in the Cambridge, the
esrrs for which would have been So
Nl year.
Reich prospered az owner Of the
Cs-bridse Hotel, but when Cochran
rsie additional demands on him he
ned in the Supreme Court 70 cancel
10 assignment Of the lease and the
.sb.lesse. which really was a mort
age, on the ground Of usury, and re-
.u,s8 70 paw instruments until Cochran
i,oueht ejectment proceedings. Sew
fr such proceedings were brought
Vile the main issue was awaiting
.ra.. and each time when forced TO
2s.h paid the rent.
B-t summons in one Of these &C
t,s in eiectment failed 10 reach
Rsa because he was i'll on Long
Lind Thereupon Cochran obtained a
-igment b. default. Then Reich's
aver al that time, without informing
bis client OF the default judgment, ad-
rssi him 70 pay his rent.
Right there came the reason for the
iisggine Of the litigation IN several
Ulris for many years.
When the suit Of Reich charging
gs.ry came 20 trial In the Supreme
Court Cochran pleaded "res adjudi-
uu" holding that the issue had a.
-iady been decided by the default IN
ts Municipal Court IN the eJectment
preceding Justice George L. lngra-
Tan, now presiding Justice Of the APP
N.sie Division. dismissed the suit OF
Reich His action was sustained IN the
appellate Division and the Court OF
appeals
Owner Seizes the Hotel.
Subsequently, while Reich was out
O The city agents Of Cochran TOOK
!ort.ble possession Of the Cambridge,
elected the Reich family, taking charge
O. al the furnishings. and, as Reich
Wore IN court, took his baby's milk
CO., Of the icebOX. Mrs. Reich, II
seems, was the owner Of the furnish
rs, and she sued and recovered ST.
|" from Cochran.
The carpet manufacturer ran the
,'e under the lease he held, and
-,eh was unsuccessful IN an EFFORT 10
'o1en the default taken against HIM:
nat case also went TO the Court OF
Appeals
telch, however was not vet through
% bis fight He brought supreme
'olrt action 20 set aside the Munlcl-
ta Court judgment Of ejectment on
ne ground Of fraud and because OF
teged collision with his own lawyer
'-d Of the lstter's negligence. Justice
p'egerich sustained Reich. This case,
100 went 10 the Appellate Division and
ne Court Of Appeals, and both tri--
.-aal' oyerruled Justice Giegerlch ana
egnd against Reich.
justice Hatch of the Appellate d.
,'ison' said in his opinion: This IS
.G striking Illustration Of how greed
wy Keep pace with opportunity" This
ta'ehee, IN the opinion Of the justice
's' not in the published version few
nonths later.
A new trial Of the action was ordered
-a the late Justice Bischof found
.galnst Reich The court held that al
hoagh Reich's lawyer had been negll-
NAl cochran was not party 20 TINS
,sghgence. Up again 70 the Court of
1l
Sold Out to AstOrs.
ne litigation continued, and in 1905,
que me finish was still far of, Coch-
y TOOK advantage Of the clause in the
's and sold out for 100000 70 the
s0'.' the hotel being turned into an
sc building. Reich figured the protit
se BY Cochran from the hotel az
VV year, and, adding the 100000
.lfen received from the Astors and
pound interest on the profits from
MOTEL Reich brought a new suit,
a4ag 100000
'5 I'D not plead usury this time and
llq not bother about the default
shent. Instead. he contended that,
eetes being mortgages, they should