New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1846-02-26
Law Courts.

SUPERIOR CouRT.-Before Judge Vanderpoe.-JohH
Oakley vs. Stephen Hdsbrouek. and ohers-Action by
teacher of one of the l4h Ward Schools of
the Trustees of the Ward $780, being quarters saa
ry already referred to- Verdict for Plaintiff, Sl5C and
interest.
Before Judge Oakley.-H1an. Lee i Co. John Ry-
ker, II. aud Varick s TroabridSe-A Of rover 70
the value OF quantity OF Pork stored IN the yard
OF Mr.. Ryker Inspector Of Beet and Pork which was
received back having been carried away lost or
disposed Of aud it is contended Varck 1row5ridse
who also had Pork the yard received that OF plaintiffs
instead OF their This is denied. Verdict for Plain
tiff against John Ryker Jr S2lSe 6s, and against V X l.
verdict FOR defendant
John 4. Miller VS.. Cro,0H Insurance Co-The plaintiff
seeks recover 5000 loss the Mahogany Sawmill
situated on Laichi, West and Washington SIS which
was burnt down in July. lS44 The policy says the
building was owned and occupied by the said John A
Miller" with machinery. sc. Ii is said property
DESTROYED worth double the amount insured For de-
fence it is contended principally thai Mr. NJ neither
owned nor occupied the building himself bur had let il
out &c both OF which points denied. The is
sill on For plaintiff Messys. c. OConor and Henry NJ
Western For defendant Mr.. 5. Sherwood.
Emerson s Brand vs. -iIbro, Hogt & Co.-Acion 10
S4i3 20 quantity OF our!sps (an article useG
for bslias domestic goods and Tor painting ong for
door cloihs) note OF Smith Hewett & Co was taken
at the time in payment but Il commended that L.
Co. had stopped payment previous TO the note being CIV
en- and Abro, Hoyt IL Co. knew at The time tina, they
had so stopped payment Il also stated that plain
,s said they wished the buraps for manufacturing
their establishment in Elizsoethtown. whereas they were
agreement had been made TO take S Il & Co.'S psper
two or three days before they had actually stopped
nonsu, ordered For plaintiffs Messrs Emerson aud
Prtchard For defendants Messrs. David Graham and
a. Peabody.
CouRr OF COMMON PLEAs.-Before Judge Daily
People Of lis State Of Ner. York Hx x AshGrG-Ac
ton TO $780, being the OF bond given IL
surety tha: Mr.. Ashsrd would maintain his wife and
family whom. it is said he had abandoned referred TO
YESTERDAY The principal defence that Mr.. A. mad
no regular employment, being engaged mostly as he
so,iaior OF paper Wssi and that ne was unable TO
maintain mis- family Il also commended that as the
bond was given in behalf OF The Commissioners OF TIE
Aims House suit could DC brought N the name oil
the People unless the family OF Mr. A. had become pup
lie charge which not the case. Il was shown ;aaf
two OF the OF Mr. A. II employment as sppren
tees and that Mrs. A maintained herself and other
children by her needleJ The Court charged that II 8
man is unable BY reason of sickness such. TO ms;1
tain his family after giving bend the law will excuse
him bu: if be has any means ne Is bound to maintain
his family to the extent OF those means II is not neces
sary thsi his family should have become public charge
in order to enforce the bond Verdict for plaintiff o
being the amount
Tlliam Elliott VS.. Washington Hob md Thomas Ho7t
Action OF premises No ll3 sullivan s.
hired By defendants lease as sosp-iactory. &c
The defence is that Messrs Holt s. Horn repaired TIE
premises Offset the charged. which Is de-
MED. To be continued this forenoon. For plaintiff,
Messrs. B. c. Ferris and l. Livingston. For defendant
Mr.. White.