Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1929-07-27
GRANTED
FOR R. |. AVE. LAND
Condemnation Jury, in Mid
night Verdict, Allows SILL
800 for Two Parcels.
BY GEORGE PORTER,
Stan CORRESPONDENT of The Star

stan Correspondent of The Star.
EVANSVILLE, Md, July 27.-Ver-
diets favorable to the owners of prop
erty condemned for the rights of way
for the extension of Rhode Island ave-
nue. were given In two cases heard by a
sheriff's jury yesterday.
The jury awarded damages Of $11 500
to Mr.. and Mrs, Morris l.. WeinStein
and Mr.. and Mrs. Max Leibold in one
case, and $3.50 to the owners of property
listed to Mrs. Annie H. Himmelfarb in
the other. Both of these amounts were
considerable in excess of the sums Of
fered by the State Roads Commission.
and the question of appealing them will
be discussed with the attorney general
of Maryland.
Verdict at Midnight.
The verdict in the Weinstein- I eiboId
case was not returned until after mid
night, the jury having deliherated near
ly an hour and half before agreeing.
1t recommended that $4,000 Of the
$11,500 be paid the Weinsteins, the
tenants by the entirety" and that the
other $4,000 be paid the Leibolds, who
operate a store in the building.
The State had offered $4,000 for the
entire property. and expert appraisers
valued 1t at $4,000. County Assessor
James Rogers said it was assessed for
tax purposes, which is supposed to be
100 per cent value, at $3.50 Another
witness called by the State told of buy
ing the premises in 1917 for $4,000 and
selling In two years later for $4,000 cash
Defense Attorney C. l.. Aiello, who
represented the Weinsteins and Lei
holds, and j. r. Lillard, who represented
W. P. Magruder, mortgage, called Mrs
Leibold to show that her business on
the premises cleared yearly profit Of
about $4,000.
Magruder was also called and told of
selling the property to Weinstein sub
ject to a $4,000 mortgage. Weinstein
declared he bought it for business pur-
poses.
The store stands on lot Of Melrose
Park. in the triangle formed by the in
terSection Of Melrose avenue and the
w. r. 81 E. tracks. The entire plot of
land is needed for the extension of the
avenue, and the house and store will
have to be demolished.
Former Owner Called.
An unusual situation developed dur
ing the hearing Of the Himmelfarb case
when Hyman Terrish, described as
former record owner" and called by
Defense Attorney j. F. Lillard. declared
he would be damaged by the extension
OF Rhode Island avenue, but was not
permitted to tell what his interest in
the property involved was.
Assistant State Attorney General
Robert H. Archer, who with William
Stanley conducted the prosecution.
claimed 1t would be impossible to fairly
weigh Terrish's testimony II the Jury
did not know what his interest in the
property was, but Lillard insisted that
N nNalvv v.-fA
damages to a piece Of property and the
courts would decide to whom the dam
ages should be paid and all other uues-
tons OF ownership. Sheriff Charles S.
Early. who presided, ruled in favor of
Lillard.
The suit named Mrs. Annie H. Him
melfarb, the record owner" and Paul
Himmelfarb Marcus Himmelfarb. Min
ME Himmelfarb. Hyman Terrish and
Bessie Terrish, former record owners"
as defendants.
Court Held on Lawn.
After being sworn in the Jury was
conducted over the property by LEROY
Kern. right Of way inspector of the
State Roads Commission. They were then
taken to the residence of County Sur
Veyor Latimer nearby, where the case
was presented in an outdoor setting,
the jurors occupying the front porch
and the lawyers addressing them from
the lawn
The State called T. H. Welsh and
George H. Lanhardt, officials of the
Hyattsville Building Association, and
valuation experts, both of whom APP
praised the land at about IS cents a
square foot. On this basis the property
condemned would have been worth
$486.50. They estimated. however, that
the extended roadway would increase
the value Of the land $4,000. For this
reason Attorney Stanley told the jury
the State believed the owner should
donate the right of way, but had offer
ed the nominal sum of SIS.
LIZARDS chief argument was that the
owners were not financially able to take
advantage Of the improvement afforded
by the extension Of the avenue. He
asked that the jury value the land at
20 cents a square foot.