New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1850-07-02

COURT CALENDAR-lHIs DAH.-COhMON fLEAS.
Part Mos 453, 455 459, 46l, 4o7, ss7, 469 All,
473, AS, Al, 49, 4sl 49, 49, 4s0 49l, 1913, 495,
497, 499, SOL SOB, sos 3d. 55 5l7, 52l, 5s3, 525.
Part II-Nos $40, 354, 326, 372, 1872, 495 3OO 592,
5s4, 500, 59s, co., and even Nos. to 622, 626 625.
SUPREME COURT-Both branches met yesterday
for their respective July terms, COR the hearing Of
argument. In the Old Branch was brought up the
assessment case Of
Vim. Laimbier VS.. the City of Nep York and
John P05ter-Mr. p. as Collector Of the assessment
forsewerin Jaue ST between east side OF Hudson St.
and Hudson River, levied upon the household iurnl'
ture of MIR L. for upward OF $500, being assessment
three lots belonging to him, and security gwen,
he brought action for damages. The case was
tried before Judge SANFORD, last year, and YER
dictrendered for defendants. The case now comes
up on exceptions
On the part Of Mr. L. it was contended that
the assessment was void by reason OF change OF
Assessors and also tt at the street numbers were
not designated On the assessment roll. By reso-
luton or ordinance Of the Commoa Council, the
Street Commissioner, the Deputy Street Comnis
soners and Frat Clerk in their office, were 70 act
az Assessors as part OF the duties OF their oihce
In ls47, the officers were changed, and the new
officers, by resolution, appointed the Assessors IL
is conieuded that Messrs. f. and r. Smith and w.
Sinclair, having been appointed the original AS
SCISSORS, they could not be superseded by mere
vote the Common Council, by Messrs. Thompson,
Dodge aud HaIce. Also, that the work was CON
ple,ed before the rev Assessors toSL the oaih'
&c Argument vas presented. Mr. Cutting ap'
pearing for MIR. l.. and Mr.. n. +. Davies iJr the
City.
Some cases, bat of minor import, were heard
in the other Branch.
MARINE CoURT-SatHrdGy, June % -toss
C0ysi vs.. Max MaTet=ek-SulG 10 recover pa ence
o. 500 due for the services OF the plaintiff AID ms
"a fba fall
all services except during the last two weeks OF
the engagement was admitted. Defendant proved
that plaintiff had lot performed part assigned MN
at a Concert on the ed OF February and claimed
forfeiure Of 500 uncer the articles OF enlightenment
Plaintiff gave evIdence tending to shoR tnaI ne
was Ill on that occasion. Defsnfant INSISTED tnas
BY the terms Of the engagement ilness must DC
proved by the physician Uf the company, and tnaI
The plaintiff was bound in all cases 70 give nouce
'of Illness before Z NJ that the performance mas nj
be changed. The Court made the following de-
cisiOn:
The plaintiff made good bis claim for a nan
morths' salary Of hpself aud sie, dae on the hrst
OF May last, which BY the terms OF the asreemsh.
with defendant was $50, but which be admitted
hao by a subsequent arrangement been reduced 20
500. The defendant claims deduction from that
salary Of slC0 for a fine incurred by p'sint1 Al
Concert en- the 25d Of February, az which be vas
appointed TO perform under an article IN the 'sn
section OF the rules and resuleti1ns referred % 10
the sgreemesi. Defendant also objected tn<S
pSintf had not given notice Of bis sickness before
JPN OF the day which defendant contends De