The Republican. [volume] (Oakland, Md.) 1877-current, 1945-05-10
Giessman Loses Suit
Filed Against County
Judgment Is Entered By Judge
Mish In Hagerstown In Favor
OF County; Appeal Taken

The suit brought by Blaine Giess-
man, former County Commissioner,
against the County Commissioners of
Garrett County to recover on num-
Der of orders issued to him Just be-
fore his term of office expired, came
to an end in the Circuit Court for
Washington County on Saturday last,
when Judgment was entered in favor
of the defendant and an appeal taken
by Cheeseman's attorneys. The case
was removed to Hagerstown from this
county and had been pending for sew
cral months. The appeal will doubt
less be heard during the October term
Of the Court Of Appeals,
In the suit, GieSsman claimed to-
tai of $27,562.5O as being due him
from Garrett County. Of this, $4,000
was based upon unpaid orders for eX-
pcnses incurred while ON trips made
by Gicssman to Baltimore in the lat
ter part Of 1912. Various items for
tips, cigars, drinks, shoe shines and
Shaves appeared in these bills which
although approved by some of the for
mer County Commissioners were re-
iected by the present board and the
orders held up. The greater part of
the claim, $27,24250. arose out of or
dcrs on which Gicssman contends the
county was indebted to his father. the
late George GicSsman. former County
Treasurer. At a special meeting at
tended only by Commissioners Chess
man and CheSton H. Browning in No.
vcmbcr, 1912, according to the records,
this claim was recognized by them as
valid claim against the county, altho
it alleged to have arisen about the
year 1920, and at the last meeting of
that board in December, 1912, orders
were issued to Gicssman for the origi-
nal principal amounting to $11 ,667.05
and interest of $15,575.45. The orders
were not presented to the County
Treasurer for payment and were out
standing when the present board came
into office, when they were promptly
rcpudiated.
On behalf of the defendant County
commissioners, pleas to the suit were
filed denying that the county owed
the money and alleging that it had
been definitely settled in a suit be-
tween the County Commissioners and
George GicSSman and the surety on
his bond. Maryland Casualty Com
pany, in 1927, that GieSsman was in
debtcd to the county to the extent Of
more than 100000 and that he had
been given full credit for the alleged
orders at that time, and furthermore
that George Giessman had shortly
thereafter taken the benefit of the
bankruptcy law and there could not
have been any valid assignment of his
alleged claim to Blaine Gicssman. To
this defense, Cheeseman's attorneys
filed a replication alleging that the
'NNlOII VI lIlN IINSNllldlI DOdIu III ItCOp-
nizing the claim and issuing the new
orders constituted valid acknowledge
mcnt of the claim and further that
George Gicssman did not know, at the
time of the former suit, that the origi-
nal orders were outstanding or had
been charged to his account and that
they were likewise not barred by age
or by the bankruptcy proceeding.
To this replication, the attorneys
for the County Commissioners E. Ray
Jones, of Oakland, and Robert II. Nc
Caulcy, Of Hagcrstown, dcmurred and
contended that the same was not a
sufficient answer to the defense filed
by them. This was sustained by Judge
Mish but leave given until April Both
to file amended papers. At that time,