In Trouble with the Law (Part 6 of 18)

Continuing with the court record of the case of Grabowski v. Niedziałkowski, let’s examine the sixth page of the record: ”Ciechanowskie Grodzkie Wieczyste”, sygn.107, k.53v.

“Ciechanowskie Grodzkie Wieczyste”, sygn.107, k.53v

“Ciechanowskie Grodzkie Wieczyste”, sygn.107, k.53v

SOURCE: Klonowo, Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, “Ciechanowskie Grodzkie Wieczyste,” sygn.107, k.53v, Grabowski v. Niedziałkowski, 1756; Archiwum Główne Akt Dawnych w Warszawie, Warsaw, Poland.

Translated from Latin to Polish, and then from Polish to English, the record states:

… disputes and grievances, and which took place on the Thursday after Easter in the year 1750, and that of the Oblates in the municipal records of Ciechanów on the Monday after the third Sunday after Easter in that same year. At that time, Wojciech Grabowski and his wife Konstancja Milewska filed a protest against the spouses Krzysztof and Konstancja née Żaboklicka, the parents, the spouses Ignacy and Zofia née Kaminska, Mateusz, their son, and also Melchior, son of the deceased Franciszek, all Niedziałkowskis, also Józef Niedziałkowski, son of the deceased Adam, and his brothers, all heirs of the deceased Andrzej Niedziałkowski and other additional defendants, about a violation of their property in the villages of Klonowo and Długołęka in the sections known as Skaskowizna, Ulatowizna and Frącowizna.
As a result of that decree, the field from the rural road to Przeczy …

To be continued…

The last few lines of the Latin record seem to be missing from the Polish translation. I will have to look into this omission later.

For other parts of this record, see:

Copyright © 2010 by Stephen J. Danko

This entry was posted in Żaboklicki, Długołęcki, Grabowski, Klonowski, Milewski, Niedziałkowski, Sosnowski and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.