The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1917-02-10
Supreme Court Awards $4,000
Suit to the Municipality.
Case Was Directed Against G..
w. Brooks and Surety Firm.
STATE LOSES INHERITANCE SUIT
Court ReverSeS Shawnee COun-
ty Lavanburg Decision.
A. X. LOngren, Topeka Aviator,
Given Damages for Late Train.

Topeka today won her $19.23197
paving case when the supreme court
| q ffirmed the decision of the Shawnee
county district court. The suit was
Greeted against G. W. Brooks and the
Title Guaranty & Surety company. Ac-
ton by the supreme court is a COM
plete victory for the city in the ia
nous paving suit.
NJ W. Gilmore, a partner of Brooks
and former party to the suit, was not
connected with the suit decided today.
II settlement of a claim held against
4 Gilmore by the city. he furnished evil
dence used by the city in prosecuting
the case handed down today by the
81 RENE court. His services to the
| city were in consideration of final set
Element of the claim.
History of Case.
On January Is, 1907, NJ. w. Gilmore
filed charges with the mayor and
council of the city of Topeka, against
James F. McCabe, then city engineer,
charging him with having solicited
and received brides in the sum of 3d.
500, because of large over-payments
made to Brooks & Gilmore, in the con-
investigation was begun into these
charges, by the city, and on October
!, 1907, a suit was begun in the dis
trict court of Shawnee county, Kansas,
against Brooks & Gilmore and their
bondsman, The Title Guaranty &
Surety company, of Scranton. Pa, to
recover over-payments in the sum of
about $4,000. Gilmore refused to
testify before the grand jury, called to
Investigate the criminal charges, for
fear he himself would be indicted, and
this left the city with the only remedy
of civil action to recover it's losses.
On January /, 1908, NJ. W. Gilmore
began an action against the city of
Topeka to recover the sum of $685.
due him on a sidewalk contract, and
the city filed a set off against Gilmore
on the Fifth ward sewer contract in
the sum of $500. and on December
16, 1909, the city was given a verdict
by the jury against Gilmore in the
sum of $S,327.78, leaving a balance
due the city on the judgment of S4,-
1860, and costs in the sum of ST.
052.25.
Frank G. Dreaming was city attor-
ney when these suits were brought
and has had charge of the litigation
since April, 1909, as special counsel
for the city. In 1914, Mr.. Dreaming
was engaged by the city to try the
case of The City of Topeka VS.. Brooks
Surety company, which had been
pending since Oct. 1, 1907. The case
was referred to Robert Stone, as ref
cree, to make findings of fact and
conclusions of law, and on Jan. Is,
1916. Mr.. Stones findings and conclu-
sions of law were sustained by Judge
A. w. Dana and judgment rendered
in favor of the city of Topeka, $19,-
231.97. In this judgment are includ-
ed the court costs in the case of NJ
w. Gilmore VS.. The City of Topeka,
which the city had been compelled to
pay, $1.154.40; attorneys fee of $3.50,
expenses o. expert engineers in the re-
survey of the Fifth ward sewer in the
sum of sS43.0S and over payments of
false estimates made by the city en-
gineer for sewer not laid, earth and
rock excavation not performed but
paid for, in the sum of 12,510.47,
with interest thereon from Sept. l
1905.
At the trial of this case before Rob-
ert Stone, referee, in December, 1914
NJ. w. Gilmore was the star witness
for the city and the referees findings
of fact more than SubStantiated every
charge that Gilmore ever made about
the fraud and bribery in connection
with this sewer contract. In fact, Mr.
Gilmore's confession led to the inves-
tigation by the city into the oVerDay-
ments in the sum of about $4,000
made in the construction of the Sixth
ward sewer and about $12, 900 of this
sum has been recovered from the con-
tractors by the city.
State Loses Important Case.
The state of Kansas lost the Simon
Lavanburg inheritance tax case TODAY
when the supreme court reversed the
decision of the Shawnee county dis
trict court and rendered judgment for
the defendant, the United States Trust
company OF New York. on an agreed
statement of facts submitted to the
trial court. The suit involved several
thousand dollars claimed bv tbe stato
from the Lavanburg estate from, santa
F'e railroad stocks owned bv the es
tate.
Lavanburg lived in New York. He
died prior to the enactment of the
kansas inheritance tax law. In his
viii he created a life estate in the
santa Re stocks. The Santa Fe is a
ansas corporation. The will pro-
Floed that his wife should have a life
interest," IN the estate and bestowed
upon her the power to appoint bene-
flclaries 10 enjoy the remainder of the
estate after her death.
Mrs. Lavanburg died after the Kan
sas inheritance tax law went on the
statute books. The stock was deposit
ea with the New York trust company.
me state sought to collect an inheri-
lance tax from the stock Funds
claimed by the state were deposited
with a Topeka bank and the case was
submitted to the district court on an
agreed statement of facts. The trial
court held that the state was entitled
Continued on Page TwoJ