Burdick v. the City of Kalamazoo

In Burdick v. the City of Kalamazoo, Roderick (Richard) Carlisle Burdick took the City of Kalamazoo to court over the land use of South Westnedge Park. In 1833, Roderick's father and mother donated the land to the then supervisor of Arcadia, Cyrus Lovell, to be used as a burial ground for the growing settlement.[1] For decades the land was used for its intended purpose until around the 1860s when bodies were no longer being entered into the cemetery. In 1895, R. C. Burdick sued the city, hoping to gain a compensation of $2,000 out of the perceived injustice.[2]

The Deposition

When R. C. Burdick filed his case, he hired the law firm Casgrain, Sullivan, Mason & Dwyer to represent him in court.[3] The City of Kalamazoo for their defense attorneys heired Osborn, Mills & Master and George P. Hopkins to represent the city.[4] The case started with R.C Burdick's deposition, taken in Minneapolis by Harris Richardson in the presence of the notary George Frank Hitchcock.[5] During the deposition, Richardson asked Burdick if he was his father's heir, why the land should revert back to him, what condition did he find the land in, and when the last time he saw the park was.[6] Burdick stated that he was his father's only surviving son, that he had read the deed and his mother Mary Ann back in the early 1870s thought that the land should revert back to them since it was no longer being used as a cemetery.[7]  Burdick also stated that by his most recent visit to the property around 1885, the land had been transformed into a park, the fence was removed, and a walkway was put through the cemetery.[8] After a cross examination with George P. Hopkins, the deposition was then mailed to the court to be reviewed and decided.  

The Verdict

Following Burdick's deposition, the case was put into limbo for a number of years. In 1898, the case was brought to the desk of George R. Sage, who became seriously ill before he got a chance to review the case, and so it was brought to the desk of Charles D. Clark.[9]. After reviewing the evidence of the case, Clark made a decision in favor of Kalamazoo with his reasoning being that the deed did not have any formal language that suggested that the deed was conditional, and that since there were still people buried at South Westnedge Park, it did not abandon its original purpose as a burial ground.[10] R.C Burdick ultimately lost the case, and died just 4 years after its conclusion in 1902.[11]

Notes:

[1]: Land deed from Cyren Burdick to Supervisor of Arcadia. 5 December 1833.

[2]: R. Carlisle Burdick vs. the City of Kalamazoo, Case File 2483 (NAID:461452176); Law Case Files; U.S. Circuit Court for the Western District of Michigan, Southern Division, Grand Rapids; Records of District Courts of the United States, Record Group 21; National Archives at Chicago, 3

[3]: R. Carlisle Burdick vs. the City of Kalamazoo, 11

[4]: R. Carlisle Burdick vs. the City of Kalamazoo, 12

[5]: R. Carlisle Burdick vs. the City of Kalamazoo, 27

[6]: R. Carlisle Burdick vs. the City of Kalamazoo, 27-33

[7]: R. Carlisle Burdick vs. the City of Kalamazoo, 28-30

[8]: R. Carlisle Burdick vs. the City of Kalamazoo, 31

[9]: R. Carlisle Burdick vs. the City of Kalamazoo, 45

[10]: R. Carlisle Burdick vs. the City of Kalamazoo, 61-62

[11]: Matt Bushnell Jones, History of the town of Waitsfield, Vermont, 1782-1908: with family genealogies, (George E. Littlefield, 1909), 251.