The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1844-04-09
Superior Court.
Before Chief Justice Jones and Judge Oakley

APRIL Sth -Decisions-In this action wa.
brought on promssory note The declaration was en-
the seventh day after commenced The defendant,
attorney took objection to the caption of the decara
ascertain it tested the first day of term Ths
plaintiffs attorney made an affidavit stating that the bill
put into his hands the day after due and tina
the tese oil the writ was the day on which issued this
the court thought sufficient why the postponemen
of trial should be allowed
Joseph S. Leggen rs. Joseph Guick-In this
ton was brought for assault and battery and false imp
sonment court martial was held fine of So imposed
and warrant issued to the Marshal directing him levy
it of the goods and chaels ofthe plaintiff and good
found then to take the body and deliver to the
keeper Of the city PRISON. but first directing the Marshal
infant of full age The Marshal returned he had
sped theinquiry and that plaintiff Of full age but
body. For this taking the plaintiff declared and defend
ant pleaded, that no improper violence was used The
plaintiff demurred on the ground that fine of Is cents
demanded for fee, that the court martial was
properly organized and that the made for tn.
fee well as for the fine Then the point before
it give proper authority. We think the 18th Johns
which in allusion to the between Great Britain
and this country in 1912, bears out the objection 1t APP
pears the plea not sufficiently show the court
martial was properly organized to impose fines, and is
ndspensaby necessary that they should show that they
were properly constituted and organized before fines car
be imposed; here nothing is shown but delivery
of warrant signed by body Of calling themselves
detective and the plaintiff must have judgment with IL
bery to defendant to plead de in payment of costs
Benjamin Day VS.. Moses Y Beach.-In this
ton for libel was brought by the plaintiff against deten
dant declaration contained three counts to which the
defendant filed pleas denying all the matter stated in the
two first counts and usyng the matter set forth in the
third count in general terms not seeing fit to disclose
what the justification u.s. but averng that If such usfca-
ton is rac and proved that usties the charges the
face ofthe libel To those pleas the plaintiff demurred
the ground that defendant did spread the record the
matter Of Justification. Judgment for plaintiff with ber
V for defendant to plead de ten days after service
Of this rule.
Howard VS. The City Fire Insurance Company.-This
was motion for trial the ground that proper
testimony not admitted and also the ground of
misderection in the Judges charge We OF opinion
that the Judge took the correct view Of it. and he
bound to let it to the jury and the motion must be de-
MED
Mabee Beaumon Motion to set aside report, the
ground that referees erred in allowing certain costs
conse fees for extra services and the further ground
that they had allowed a certain debt under conditional
promise made by plaintiff after he had taken the benefit of
the bankrupt act Report to be set aside unless il is
difed as to exclude the allowed under the cond
tonal promise.
Egeleso He,rick-New trial granted on paym Of
costs.
Graham VS.. Richards. New trial granted
Before Judge Oakley.
ArRu S. Peter Murray vs. Peter SMITH Err Sc.-This
was an action brought 70 $3.50 The question
turned on point Of law, and the Judge directed the jury
to find verdict for plaintiff subject the opinion OF the
Court on bill of exceptions.