New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1848-12-04
caarf OF Appeals-Nevenber Form.

sYRAcrsL Thursday, Nov. 30.-On coming IN
Of the Court this morning Hon James R Lawrence
resumed his argument part Of respondents in cause
No % Mr.. b. Davis NoxOn heard on part Of sp
pellani and closed. 90 No. n samuel D. Dakn ard
other appellant, a9f James Bsy. respondent + J.
Richardson attorney for appellants A. Coburu attorney
for respondent Cause called and decree affirmed By
default on motion Of respondent. No . Samuel D.
Dsxn and other appellants est William Bsiiy respond
dent Z J. Richardson st'orney for appellants, a. CO
burn Tor respondent Cause called and decree a.
hrned by defsul; motion Of respondent
No - Samuel D. Daken and other sppeilents asf Jno
NJ Bzily. respondent. z Richardson attorney for
appellants 4. C05urn, attorney for respondent Cause
called and decree affirmed BY default on motion Of re-
.pOndent. No 30 Samuel d. Dskin and other appel
lsnts at Thomas Bsiy 81 al, respondent. = Rich
sfdson attorney for appellants Coburn attorney for
respondents Cause called sud affirmed By default on
motion Of respondent. No. 81 Asenath Aiken scrnx
sc. respondent at Jno. Mathews snd others. appel
lgnts Messrs SOxOn LssvenWOrth, attorney for re-
sy0ndent Gardner la wrence attorney for aype snts
X Davis Noxon Eco Of counsel for appellant opened
the argument Of this cause. Geo T. Comstock ESQ Of
counsel for responder, heard unit; the adjourn
men, Of the Court DAILY star
SYRACUSE Friday. Dec J.
DECISIONS SovEaBER TEEE, l535. MADE DIG J. l545.
Jsdgmess A5rnsed Val Leuven plaintiff IN error, &C.
Like et A. plaintiffs in error Harvey psintf in error
Oimsiead and others heirs &c defendants 10 error
Wendell, plaintiff in error C.. Crsndall defendant 10
error Wells, plaintiff ia error, r. Wilson defendant
Ia error WOrrsl, plsintia in Psrmlee de-
iendan, IN error Pts, psintf IN error, a. Wider de-
endsnt In error Van Rensselaer,, plaintiff In error rf
POucher defendant D error BOyee plaintiff In error
90. Conan, IT. defendant in error Warod plants IN
error, "a sbuler, defendant 10 error.
Judgment Tcu1seG-r>nrrc dc moro b. fh> SaPrer7e
Ccurt-Costs to abide me eseat-Buckmsn, plaintiff In
error cs Covsn. defendant in error. Brigham. Jr.
plaintiff IN error Fowler defendant in error Hin a.
SANFORD plaintiffs in error, TO- Covel, defendant IN
error.
D,oee. Of he Cunt Of CAaactry and Of re Supreme
Court reressd and that f bA Be dishs,ssed "nA costs Of
he Curt be!oH-The Farmers Loan Trust Company,
Implicated &c appellants 20. Walworth Clerk &c rec
Ees ,rial eranted-o0ss 10 abide erent-Butler s
EOsburgh appellants Miller, sheriff, &C. respond
ent Gardner appellee, rs Heart appellant.
DscrsesOf he CoSrf bel0u reo1sed and bA disrissed
rifi c0sfs IN that C0uf Hallary a Hunter, respond
ents r.. Ysnderheyden and wife, appellants Wider
& Sutherland, respondents, 70 Bingham, admir-
appellant.
Judgment reoerse6 and pyi Of cerOrari quashed The
Mohawk and Hudson Railroad Company, plaintiffs In
error Is. Hill g. Aldrich, defendants In error.
Decrs, mOd6ed By striking ont nc ords fos ftousaHd
d0ars" ulererer they m The decrcs and tnseTtaS
The uOrds three fbOasand dollars IN the place ftsrfo-
Mary Martin By her next friend appellant Norris L.
Martin, respondent
usrsed and hai Of Justice ofrmed-Crppen plaintiff in
error. -. Abrams defendant in error.
Dsor,e affirmed IN part and rervsed IN pGrt.-Dunlop
respondent, Cute and Cute, implicated &c. appel.
lsnis.
R,a1gunenf Ordered-Msson, appellant ~ Jones
ana others respondents Roe plaintiff in error, rs Doe
defendant In error.
Agpeal disnissed nth oos,s Of aPpeaL-Wakeman &
skinner respondents Hszelton and Wife. appel
lauts
Notion diszss appeal aeaied iotthOt o0sts ana Htth
out prejudice Baldwin respondent, r. Titon, appel
lsst
After announcing the foregoing decisions the Court
took up the csleudsr-(there being no motons) Mr.
Geo r. Comstock resumed the srgumut for respondent
10 cause No 81 and M B. Davis Soxon concluded for
appellants.
No 32-Dsvid = Colvin plaintiff In error Charles
A Holbrook defendant IN error. Nexon, Leavenworth
and COmstock attorneys for plaintiff In Forbes
and Sheldon, attorneys for defendants in error Mr.
Davis Noxon argued this for plaintiffs in error
-snd Mr. John G Forbes for the defendant in error.
DAILY Star.