HOME | FAMILY TREES | RECOLLECTIONS | STRICTLY SOLVAY | ETC. | READ ABOUT IT | NAME DROPPING
 
More on Rosa Koziol Smolinski Karolewski Lubak

Syracuse Herald, November 26, 1915
Mrs. Rosa Karolewski, the fifth and only surviving wife of Stanley Karolewski, today failed to have his daughter by his first marriage, Mrs. Catherine Mancynkowski [Marcinkowski] punished for spending the proceeds of an insurance policy on his life. Judge Cady’s decision clears up one of several quarrels between the widow and her stepdaughter.

Karolewski was past middle age and had grandchildren when he took his fifth wife. He had one daughter and two sons who did not approve of his marriage. From the beginning, his fifth wife and her stepdaughter were at odds, both admit.

Karolewski suffered from tuberculosis, and his wife says she went to work to earn enough money to pay for physicians, medicine and rent. During her absence one day, she says, her stepdaughter brought an express wagon up to the house and carted away her father and his belongings.

Mrs. Karolewski accused her stepdaughter of taking some of the furniture, and she brought suit against both her husband and his daughter for its possession.

Neither appeared to defend the action, and judgment for $91.40 was given her by Judge Ryan by default. Karolewski died and his widow sought the money from his daughter. Judge Cady appointed Norman A. Crumb referee to learn the financial responsibility of Mrs. Mancynkowski [Marcinkowski] and determine whether she had anything from which judgment could be paid.

It developed by her own testimony that the second day after Karolewski was brought to his daughter’s home, she substituted her name for that of his wife as beneficiary of a policy for $500 in the Polish Roman Catholic Union of America. The girl was to get $400, and her brothers the balance. The papers were returned in the changed form from the headquarters of the society in Chicago on a Tuesday, when Karolewski signed them. He died the following Thursday.

Referee Crumb ordered Mrs. Mancynkowski [Marcinkowski] not to spend any of the money from this policy until deduction was made for the judgment of her stepmother. She said that she had promised her father that she would give him a good funeral, and would pay all expenses and his debts out of the policy. She added that she would keep her word irrespective of the consequences.

Mrs. Mancynkowski [Marcinkowski] collected her $400, paid all but $30, and reappeared before Referee Crumb, and told what she had done with the policy money.

Through her attorneys, Olmstead, Van Bergen and Searl, Mrs. Karolewski secured an order directing Mrs. Mancynkowski [Marcinkowski] to show cause why she should not be punished for contempt of court by disobeying the referee’s order and spending the money.

George B. Becker appeared for Mrs. Mancynkowski [Marcinkowski] and argued that there was sufficient excuse in spending the money to relieve her of contempt. He also said that the widow had received $1,000 on another insurance policy on her husband’s life, and had refused to pay for his funeral expenses.

Justice Cady held that under the insurance law, the $400 received by Mrs. Mancynkowski [Marcinkowski] was exempt from the judgment, and she had a right to spend it as she pleased. He taxed the widow $10 costs for seeking the order, but allowed her the privilege of further examining her stepdaughter to see if she has any other money she can attach.

Syracuse Journal, November 26, 1915
Because Mrs. Catherine Mancynkowski [Marcinkowski] spent the proceeds of a $400 life insurance policy in keeping her promise to her father to give him a good funeral, Mrs. Rosa Karolewski, fifth wife and now widow of Stanley Karolewski, wants her step-daughter punished for contempt of court.

Disobedience of an order directing Mrs Mancynkowski [Marcinkowski] to keep the $400 intact so that a $91.40 judgment obtained by her step-mother could first be deducted, is charged by Mrs. Karolewski.

From the very day Karolewski was married for the fifth time, there was friction in the family, his daughter refusing to have anything to do with the new wife. Karolewski, at the time of his death, was well past middle age, and had grandchildren.

Mrs. Karolewski today tried in vain to satisfy Judge Cady that she was entitled to an order to punish her stepdaughter for contempt of court, and to exact this penalty either by imprisonment of a fine.

The court ruled that under the insurance law, the proceeds of the police were exempt from the judgment. He then taxed the widow $10 costs, but allowed her some consolation by granting her permission to ascertain whether Mrs. Mancynkowski [Marcinkowski] possesses any other money from which judgment can be collected.

This judgment was obtained by Mrs. Karolewski after her step-daughter came to the home in her absence and carted away from furniture, part of which she says belonged to her, as she had brought it with her when she became Karolewski’s wife.

Karolewski was victim of tuberculosis, and when he was slowly dying, he moved to his daughter’s house, and transferred to her a $400 policy on the Polish Roman Catholic Union, which had previously stood in his wife’s name. The altered papers were signed two days before Karolewski’s death.

Mrs. Mancynkowski [Marcinkowski] explained this transaction by her promise to pay all her father’s funeral expenses from the proceeds of the policy.

In spite of the court order forbidding her to spend any of the money, Mrs. Mancynkowski [Marcinkowski] used all expect $30 in keeping her promise.

Attorney George B. Becker, representing the daughter, told Judge Cady that she ought not to be punished when she had used the money for funeral expenses, while the fifth wife, in spite of receiving another $1,000 policy, had not contributed a cent toward the funeral.

Syracuse Journal, October 12, 1923
To what extent Mrs. Rose Lubak was injured, mentally and physically, as the result of an alleged attack at a Polish wedding, when, she claims, Andrew Yonkocki (Jankowski) struck her, is now in the hands of a Supreme Court jury to decide. Mrs. Lubak values her injuries and humiliation at $5,000.

It all grew out of remarks alleged to have been made regarding the color of the gown worn by Yonkocki’s daughter, the bride, Yonkocki accusing Mrs. Lubak of criticizing the gown and the general appearance of the bride.

Mrs. Lubak denies she found any fault with the gown or that she made any uncomplimentary remarks, claiming Yonkocki struck her without cause or provocation.

“I will never be the same to my dying day,” she declared on the witness stand, but this was stricken out on the ground it was a conclusion and not a matter of fact, the jury being instructed to decided on the condition of the plaintiff.

The case went to the jury shortly after noon.

Syracuse Journal, October 13, 1923
Post-wedding fights failed to greatly interest a Supreme Court jury which returned a verdict in favor of the defendant in the $5,000 action brought by Mrs. Rose Lubak against Andrew Yonkoski, after deliberating a short time Friday afternoon.

Mrs. Lubak sued to recover for injuries she claimed to have received when Yonkoski struck her because he thought she was making uncomplimentary remarks about the gown his daughter was being married in. Criticism of the color and style of the wedding dress precipitated a lively climax to the wedding festivities and the resulting court action.

Syracuse Journal, November 8, 1924
When Mrs. Rose Lubak, 60, of Solvay, is alleged to have remarked two years ago that the daughter of Andrew Yonkosky, a neighbor, so far upset the rules of convention as to wear a black hat instead of a white one when she was married, she said a mouthful, legally speaking.

The alleged remark got an immediate rise out of Yonkosky, who overheard it and he made some sort of scathing replay calling for a retort on the part of Mrs. Lubak, followed by several exchanges of repartee.

Then, Mrs. Lubak alleged, words failed Yonkosky, and he attacked her, bruising her about the face and body.

Mrs. Lubak sued for $5,000 damages, but the jury failed to sympathize and returned a verdict of no cause of action. Now Mrs. Lubak is appealing to the Appellate Division to have the verdict set aside and a new trial granted.

Syracuse Post-Standard, April 19, 1961
Peter Lubak, 76, of 424 Wilkinson Street, died Monday evening at his home. A native of Poland, he lived in Syracuse about 50 years.
Surviving are a brother, Felix Lubak of Syracuse, and a sister, Mrs. Rosalie Kulesa of Poland.

Services will be at 8:30 a.m. tomorrow at the Bordynski Funeral Home, 1036 West Genesee Street, and at 9 a.m. in Holy Cross National Catholic Church. Burial will be in the church cemetery in Amboy.

 
There are several name spelling inconsistencies in the newspaper
articles. They appear here as they did in print.
 
HOME CONTACT