Hayes-Mackey v. The Olentangy Park Co.: Difference between revisions
Created page |
mNo edit summary |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
Robert Turner, owner of "The Villa" prior to the park being built, was brought into the suit with Dusenbury claiming the new fences marked where Turner planned to open a saloon next to the park. Judge Badger granted a restraining order on May 13, 1901, against any interference with the fence until the true lot line could be determined.<ref>"Olentangy Park Fence." ''Columbus Evening Dispatch.'' 13 May 1901. Pg. 6.</ref> | Robert Turner, owner of "The Villa" prior to the park being built, was brought into the suit with Dusenbury claiming the new fences marked where Turner planned to open a saloon next to the park. Judge Badger granted a restraining order on May 13, 1901, against any interference with the fence until the true lot line could be determined.<ref>"Olentangy Park Fence." ''Columbus Evening Dispatch.'' 13 May 1901. Pg. 6.</ref> | ||
In January of the following year, it was brought to trial. Manager Dusenbury claimed the "roads" were never dedicated for public use.<ref>"Olentangy Park Fence." ''Thursday Columbus Dispatch.'' 16 January 1902. Pg. 5.</ref> Judge Evans ruled in August 1902, that the streets were public property and the fences would need to be moved back 15-25 feet (4.6-7.62 meters). This ruling was based on an 1887 deed by a Mrs. Guetner for the property to be public property.<ref>"Public Property." ''Sunday Columbus Dispatch.'' 3 August 1902. Pg. 5.</ref> | In January of the following year, it was brought to trial. Manager Dusenbury claimed the "roads" were never dedicated for public use.<ref>"Olentangy Park Fence." ''Thursday Columbus Dispatch.'' 16 January 1902. Pg. 5.</ref> Judge Evans ruled in August 1902, that the streets were public property and the fences would need to be moved back 15-25 feet (4.6-7.62 meters). This ruling was based on an 1887 deed by a Mrs. Guetner for the property to be public property.<ref>"Public Property." ''Sunday Columbus Dispatch.'' 3 August 1902. Pg. 5.</ref> Dusenbury appealed this decision.<ref>''Saturday Columbus Dispatch.'' 16 August 1902. Pg. 5.</ref> | ||
==References== | ==References== | ||
<references /> | <references /> | ||
Revision as of 20:07, 24 November 2022
In 1901 Season, Otto L. Hayes [or Hays] and David Mackey, owners of the ball grounds sued the park company over relocating fences on the east and south sides to cut through public streets. The fight was said to be over a disagreement over Hayes and Mackey wanting to raise the rent of the ball grounds of $1,400 ($48,886 in 2022) and the park refused.[1][2] Two days later, the old fences were removed. Dusenbury said the fences were put in place two years ago and went up the Hayes-Mackey property line.[3]
Robert Turner, owner of "The Villa" prior to the park being built, was brought into the suit with Dusenbury claiming the new fences marked where Turner planned to open a saloon next to the park. Judge Badger granted a restraining order on May 13, 1901, against any interference with the fence until the true lot line could be determined.[4]
In January of the following year, it was brought to trial. Manager Dusenbury claimed the "roads" were never dedicated for public use.[5] Judge Evans ruled in August 1902, that the streets were public property and the fences would need to be moved back 15-25 feet (4.6-7.62 meters). This ruling was based on an 1887 deed by a Mrs. Guetner for the property to be public property.[6] Dusenbury appealed this decision.[7]
References
- ↑ "Beat the Injunction." Columbus Evening Dispatch. 27 April 1901. Pg. 7.
- ↑ "Olentangy Park Fences." Columbus Evening Dispatch. 11 May 1901. Pg. 6.
- ↑ "Short Items." Columbus Evening Dispatch. 13 May 1901. Pg. 7.
- ↑ "Olentangy Park Fence." Columbus Evening Dispatch. 13 May 1901. Pg. 6.
- ↑ "Olentangy Park Fence." Thursday Columbus Dispatch. 16 January 1902. Pg. 5.
- ↑ "Public Property." Sunday Columbus Dispatch. 3 August 1902. Pg. 5.
- ↑ Saturday Columbus Dispatch. 16 August 1902. Pg. 5.