New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1847-05-25
Inv (OurIs.

SUPERIOR CoURT.-Chief Justice Iones on Saturday
pronounced the following Decisions
Cabin f. Hull vs. Mortimer Il. + HdTTisOH.-Mr Hull
claims damages for breach Of contract in Mr. Harrison
sending other agents into certain States 10 sell Peters
Pills when he had agreed to give the exclusive right Of
sale to said Hull. Damage is claimed TO the extent of
profits the sales by those agents and motion made
for reference ascertain such. The Court said
ference could not be allowed on items OF damage not
constituting account between the parties Motion
denied
T. r. Suih VS.. Henry S. SDit-Appeal from Jus
tees Court-Acon alleged lost note OF S25. The
Court considers that the witness failed to prove the
note to have been that of defendant beside which, de-
PENDANT called upon for payment OF the note,
nor given understand that such note existed against
him. The Justice in the Court below was right ia or
dering n nonsut
Patrick Doonie It. al plaintiff in error vs.. Daaiel James
defendant in rrU-Appeal-Action by q workman
against the of buildings TO claim against
Edward lsby the contractor, on ths ground that the
paid the contract after notice. he offer OF plaintiff
to place the contractor the stand justly ruled
under the decision OF the Supreme Court beside which
there necessity OF his doing for the purpose
asked. The plaintiff failed to show there anything
due, and the nonsuit was properly ordered by the
Court below. Judgment affirmed.
/ John w. Rumsey plaintiff IN error WiHiam Danes
defendant IN GT0r-AppeaL-Action of trespass in the
Court below for Mr.. r. the landlord mailing up door,
right of access through which claimed by Mr.. D..
the tenant The Court considers the tenant had such
right. Verdict in his favor confirmed.
Jacob DicfeRbdoher plaintiff in error vs. James McGay
defendant tR 0Tor-Appeal-Action by Mr.. MEG. In a
Justices Court to recover attorney and counsel fees for
trying an action for SANDER in this Court in which the
plaintiff recovered verdict Of $40, which gave him a
like amount of costs The bill of Mr. McGsy for costs
$40 which Mr.. d. refused pay, alleging that he
only had to pay his Counsel and Attorney the $40 re-
covered. In this he erred. The Attorneys fees are
earned and payable il the plaintiff recovered
nothing. Judgment in favor Of Mr. MEG affirmed
John j. Pdlmer vs. The Mayor ConmORdhy, sc. Of Ne0.
rk-These were two suits OF ejectment to recover
possession of some property sold for assessments and
bought by the Corporation under the law allowing it 10
do where no bid Is made 10 take the property and
pay the assessments. After the time allowed by law,
the Corporation executed to itself lease and then
ed without taking possession giving notice 10 the
owner VI the six months additional allowed 10 redeem.
The question is if the Corporation had such possession
would enable them to be sued as defendants. As to
the notice it was said that plaintiff resident,
and that not necessary. At the trial the Court
thought the Corporation had not taken possession
ercisod such acts OF ownership that action OF
eIectmeni could be brought and ordered nonsuit.-
NOnsuit confirmed.
Go,ieb Gla.r VS.. Robgt Dmsoc It al-Achon for curing
and dressing hides and skins At plaintiff establishment at
lOnkers. In defence said that the OF
action had been passed upon In action OF replevin be
tween the parties and motion Of nonsuit ordered.
Motion is made to set the nonsu aside the ground
that the action OF repevin was against the agent Of
plaintiff aud that he bound by it. To meet this
1t was said that plsnta himself employed counsel in
that case directed the proceedings and fully defended
the case for himself Ia doing this Court thinks
be is esopped from the present suit. Motion to set
aside nonsuit denied.
hnfAs & hfdd a. az. We. kdNdfd a. b1sN10tst q d.
freight on two cargoes OF oranges from Mstan
zss one cargo OF which wholly Lost the voyage
and the other partly 10 was commended that the de
PENDANTS agreed to pay = % freight per thousand Tor all
think but considers that the charge OF the judge who
tried the that they should be paid fregh, tor what
they delivered here, was correct Judgment for plaintiffs
/ for SIS 10.
Par Gassner vs.. LGrregoe T. Rasted e dL-Action on
an accommodation note for upward OF $500 on which
S2j were advanced and passed By the holder TO plain
81 NrNN hsrfA y had
paid such for It, verdict given for sl2o motion s
made for trial the ground of newly dscoyered
testimony being the brother OF Mr. Hopkins who passed
il 10 Mr. q. The Court thinks the testimony offered
would DO contradictory to that Of Mr.. II. himself Mo
ton Tor new trial denied.
.Iames ~ HAaoliasoa vs. George ". Comstoos, q AZ
The plaiuta bought OF Messrs ComstOck 4 Co. horse
for which be gave $500 and which he purchased with a
view TO going 10 Vermont The horse was iOund 10 be
lame sherwsrd and Dr. Budd gave certificate OF w
soundness. The plaintiff offered the horse back. eui
| Nessrs C. & Co. would not sccptit he then notified
them of an intention sell the horse at auction at al
tersas on certain day their account winch ne ala
and il brought s92 Mr.. Ii. bought the horse IN
consequence Of seing II advertised IN the sun
and Courier wherein IL represented 70 De
sound ana 70 apply to Messrs. c. & Co. Cortland
ST. This was held on the trial 10 be warrant ana
verdict was rendered for plaintiff Of sto, beng me
difference between the price paid and what II SOFA ior
Motion 10 made for new tra. the grouna tnat the
advertisement not warrant that the iameness
OF the horse temporary, owing 10 le shoes being
badly put on-thst 1t really was worth all mat vas
given or H. aud that the estimate should hsve been tee
value of the hoTse and not what II sold AZ auction io
This Court considers advertisement II really proved
10 have been inserted by the parties, to be warranty
When the horse found to be lame, 10 matter from
wis, cause the defendants should have taken II back
The plaintiff was ght sell IS be did on their refusal
and he estimate of damage not too great Motion
for new trial denied
EXTENSIVE FRAUD The Madison WISCONSIN,
Argus announces the discovery within ine as. ,er
OF an astounding fraud upsn the people aud Territory
II sppesrs from examination that lsrse
of Territorial Scrip known have been once paia Guy
OF the funds provided By the General Government asVe
been resued at different places and again In crcus
la,on No doubt exists according to the Argus tnst
thousands Of dollars arc sos and Il Is feared the fraud
Is a. extensive Il has beer successful The Argus
nrnnise. fun expose OF this hilarious nansacnon ana