http://www.cooganresearchgroup.com/crg/index.htm 11 August 2022 COOGAN story ____________________________________________________________________ appearing in the "New York Times" [NY], 01 DEC 1897: HE CHARGES CONSPIRACY Edward Coogan Alleges that His Brother and Mother-in-Law De- frauded Him Out of a Large Sum. Testimony in the suit of Edward V. Coogan against his brother, James J. Coogan, and his mother-in-law, Mrs. Sarah Lynch, whom he charges with conspiring to defraud him out of his legal and vested rights in property amounting to many thousands of dollars, was heard yesterday before Referee Ogden, at 111 Broadway. Ed-Judge George M. Curtis, representing the plantiff, undertook to prove that his client had been deprived of a third interest in the houses 225 and 227 Sixth Avenue. The premises were originally leased to Mrs. Lynch at $12,000 a year, and then released to Samuel Zeimer at $32,000 a year. Edward V. Coogan, testifying in his own behalf, said that he was in the furniture business with his brother, James J. Coogan, from March, 1888, to May, 1893, and that he was to receive one-third of the profits and share one third of the liabilities. As the reason of the firm's going out of existence he gave insolvency, adding that the books were burned by Bookkeeper Frank E. Emsley, now dead. Part of the ledger, however, he said, had been saved, and that showed that Mrs. Lynch was indebted to her sons-in-law in the sum of $70,000, partly through ficticious entries. He further testified that Mrs. Lynch had received about $30,000 from Samuel Zeimer for the cancellation of the lease, and that James J. Coogan had sold the fixtures in the buildings, valued at $40,000, for $20,000. He said that his brother had informed him during the conversation that he (the plaintiff) would never receive a cent from the Sixth Avenue property, and that when examined in supplementary proceedings, his brother had sworn that he had no property, although at the time Mrs. Lynch was indebted to him in a large sum. Mrs. Lynch, he said further, had made a clear profit for herself and James J. Coogan of nearly $200,000, but refused any payment to him. By mutual consent the case went over until a week from next Monday. ____________________________________________________________________ appearing in the "New York Times" [NY], 29 DEC 1897, PAGE 4: POLO GROUNDS TRANSFERRED MRS. LYNCH SEEKS TO REDUCE HER LIABILITY IN THE COOGAN SUIT There was a continuation yesterday before the referee of the suit of Edward V. Coogan against his brother, James J. Coogan, and Mrs. Sarah Lynch, the latter's mother-in-law. Just before the close of the day's proceedings the plantiff's counsel, ex-Judge Curtis, was informed that the Polo Grounds, at One Hundred and Fifty-fifth Street, had been transferred by Mrs. Lynch to her daughter. The property that would be liable to attachment in the event of the suit being successful had thus been greatly reduced. Counsel for the defendants stated, however, that Mrs. Lynch still had a large tract of land above the Speedway, worth more than a million dollars, and that the tract conveyed was only about one-fifth of her realty. Edward V. Coogan was cross examined by Henry Anderson for the defendant. He said that he had had charge of the liquidation of his brother's furniture business, but had never been able to learn what the proceeds of the auction sale of the stock were. He had understood that they had been divided between his brother and the bookkeeper, and that the latter had paid out a portion of the money for rent. The debts, he believed, exceeded $15,000. The examination will be resumed on Jan. 5. ____________________________________________________________________ appearing in the "New York Times" [NY], 11 NOV 1898: [Lawsuit synopsis posted at "County Carlow Coogan Immigrants"] "Edward V. Coogan (a partner in the Coogan Brothers' Furniture business) against Sarah Lynch and others. Edward's action was intended to prevent disposal of property at '155th St. n.s. 14.5 ft. east of St. Nicholas Avenue, running n. 99.11 to w.s. of Edgecomb Road x irreg. to Croton Aqueduct, extending to Harlem River Driveway; 8th Ave., ... 159th ... to Old River St. x n.w. 33.4 x irreg. to 156th St." [The case would be tried in New York Supreme Court] ____________________________________________________________________ appearing in the "New York Times" [NY], 25 JUN 1899: PRESIDENT COOGAN WINS Suit Brought by Edward B. Coogan Practically Dismissed By the terms of a decision handed down in the Supreme Court yesterday, Justice Truax practically dismisses the suit brought by Edward B. Coogan against James J. Coogan, President of the Borough of Manhattan; Sarah Lynch, and Harriet G. Coogan. The decision contains the provision, however, that the plaintiff may continue his action again by the service of an amended complaint. The suit grows out of business transactions of the old firm of Coogan Brothers, in which the plaintiff and James J. Coogan were partners. Edward Coogan alleged in his complaint that Mrs. Sarah Lynch became indebted to the firm to the extent of $100,000. The money was advanced for the purpose of improving certain property belonging to Mrs. Lynch. Under the partnership agreement he held a one-third interest in the business, and he claimed his share of the debt and interest would amount to $40,000. He sued to recover that amount. Edward Coogan also alleges that James J. Coogan and Mrs. Lynch are conspiring to prevent him from recovering a judgment upon the alleged indebtedness. He further asserts that in 1897 Mrs. Lynch, for the purpose of defrauding him, transferred the property in question to Mrs. Harriet G. Coogan. The Coogan partnership was dissolved in 1893. Besides asking for a judgment for $40,000, the plaintiff asked for an injunction restraining Mrs. Lynch or Mrs. Coogan from disposing of or transferring the property in question; that a receiver be appointed, and that Mrs. Lynch be compelled to account for one-third of the money due to the old firm of Coogan Brothers. ____________________________________________________________________