THE CASE OF TRAMMELL ET AL AGAINST SAMUEL INMAN
THE ATLANTA JOURNAL
Monday Evening, October 14, 1901, Page 7
BIG EJECTMENT SUIT HAS BEGUN
THE CASE OF TRAMMELL ET AL AGAINST SAMUEL INMAN ON TRIAL.
The trial of the first of the ejectment suits commenced by John Trammell and his two sisters, Mr. Hattie Turner and Mrs. Mattie Neill, as heirs of the late Mrs. Lucinda Trammel, for the recovery of various pieces of valuable real estate in the business portion of Atlanta was begun before Judge J. H.
Lumpkin in the superior court this morning. This is the suit against Samuel M. Inman and involves real estate on the west side of Forsyth street just south of Mitchell street, which is valued at $75,000 to $100,000.
The plaintiffs base their claim for recovery on a marriage settlement executed by their father and mother at the date of their marriage in 1846, in which Dickerson H. Walker was appointed trustee. The property has since that time changed hands a number of times, and the defendants claim undisputed title by prescription.
The plaintiffs contend that the marriage settlement made Walker trustee for Mrs. Trammell and her children; in other words, that Mrs. Trammell had a life estate in the property only and that upon her death the property was vested in her children.
The defendants take issue with this contention and maintain that Mr. Trammell took the whole fee simple estate and that when the property was conveyed by Walker, trustee, the purchaser from him acquired perfect title to the whole estate.
In all there is nearly a score of suits. The other defendants are Walker P. Inman, George C. Drummond, V. P. Sisson, Hoke Smith and others, Mary J. Warnock, Lemuel C. Downs, Walter B. Walcott, Helen B. Leavens, Mrs. Eulah Griffin, James F. Hollingsworth, Julian H. Dickson, Mrs. Georgia Dunlap, William A. Downs, East Atlanta Land company, Mary A. Smith, Owen Halleran
and Mrs. H. H. Meyers.
This is one of the largest land claims ever filed in Georgia and when it comes down to the legal aspects of the case one of the most complicated. It puts in jeopardy property which has been held in some cases by the present holders, for twenty, thirty, and even forty years. In some cases this property has been acquired recently by various persons from those who had held it for several years believing the titles safe.
The first of the cases which is now on trial promises to be a long and hardfought one. The attorneys in the case are Ulyses Lewis and King & Spalding for the plaintiff and Gray, Brown & Randolph and John L. Hopkins & Sons for the defendant.
Submitted by Barb Johnson.