OCR Text |
Show IM'INTYRE REPLIES IN MINING CASE Conflicting Statements Made by Brothors-m-Lav Regarding Ajax Idinlng Stock. In the action broucht by J, T. Donahue Dona-hue nsalnst his brothor-ln-law, Samuel Mclntyre. In which 20,000 shares of stock In the Ajax Mining company in Involved, the defendant yesterday filed, an answer In the District court denying deny-ing ho used fraud or misrepresentation In securing any kind of a settlement from the plaintiff. The complaint which was filed last-November last-November alleged that Mclntyre had Induced the plaintiff, his brother-in-law, to turn over 20.000 shares of stock to aid him In controlling: the policy of the Ajax Mining company, of 'which iUdntyre wna to be tho. general manager. man-ager. In consideration of the transfer, , It is alleged, an agreement was entered into whereby the defendant agreed to carry the stock without cost to the plaintiff. , . It Is further alleged that In March, 1S96. the defendant sold 10,000 eharea of the stock of the plaintiff, for which it is believed ho secured S10.G0O. In November No-vember of that year, the plaintiff avers, that Mclntyre with the expresB purpose of inducing him to execute a receipt In full for the stock and with intent to defraud de-fraud the plaintiff, represented that he still held the stock, that it had cost him considerable money to carry it and that It had no real value owing to the dls-Fenslon dls-Fenslon that existed in the "directory of the company. Donahue claimed that the defendant Induced him to accept sufllclent stock at 6S cents per share to equal 54220 as a full and fair settlement, settle-ment, and told him to Immediately sell the stock, as It had no realValuc. He asked that the court rescind the receipt given, that an accounting bo had and that the plaintiff be given judgment for what should be found due , In his answer Mclntyre denies that his brother-in-law was the owner of stock to exceed 10.000 shares in the Ajax company or that he represented to the plaintiff that if he would transfer trans-fer any rtock to him it would aid him in controlling tho policy of the com-panv. com-panv. Mclntyre further denies that the plaintiff was deceived or that the plaintiff plain-tiff relied upon any representations rmdo by him in regard to their relationship, rela-tionship, or that any of the representations representa-tions made were false or untrue, in tho plaintiff's receipting In full for all The defendant also holds that the plaintiffs cause of action Is barred by provisions of tho civil proceeduro of the State, and asks that the complaint be dismissed for want of equity and that he secure Judgment for costs. |