Settlement reached between Brookfield and James Fountain over access to land

[Newspaper]

Publication: The Perth Amboy Evening News

Perth Amboy, NJ, United States
vol. 36, no. 134, p. 4, col. 4


SETTLEMENT MADE

IN OLD BRIDGE CASE


Reach Agreement in Suit of

Fountain vs. Brookfield

Glass Co. Before the Trial.


Special to the EVENING NEWS.

New Brunswick, Jan. 20 — The suit brought by Asbury and James Foun­tain versus the Brookfield Glass Com­pany, all of Madison township, was settled yesterday afternoon as it was about to go on, following the unex­pected ending of the Rowan-Mundy trial. The suit by the Fountains was to decide the right to pass over three rights of way, over the land of the de­fendants near Old Bridge and thus enable the Fountains to gain ingress and agress [sic] egress from their property to the South Amboy-Bordentown turnpike. The tract inland is now valuable, be­cause of the powder boom in that section, but was practically worthless without the rights of way.

To adjust the matter the defendants offered to sell the tract of land, containing ten [missing text] which the [missing text] recently sold their interest [missing text] powder company, which now occupies it, and now will endeavor to sell the ten acre tract as well, it is understood. The Foun­tains have made a small fortune by the war, selling all their vacant hold­ings in Sayreville township for up­wards of $175 an acre.

Russell E. Watson and John A. Coan were attorneys for the Foun­tains, and Charles R. Ross, of South Amboy, represented the defendant company. Asbury Fountain, brother of James Fountain, and one of the defendants, is well known throughout the county as a former director of the Board of Freeholders. He is at pres­ent supervisor of schools of Madison township.

The unexpected settlement of the Fountain case, brought on the suit of Elizabeth Reilly, administratrix vs. the Mayor and Common Council, of the city of New Brunswick, which may take all of today and run into to­morrow.


Keywords:Brookfield
Researcher notes:The original paper copy that the microfilm was made from is missing pieces and therefore about 5 to 6 lines of part of the article is missing.
Supplemental information: 
Researcher:Bob Stahr
Date completed:August 5, 2023 by: Bob Stahr;