The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1851-07-18
Court OF Appeals.


DECISIONS AT ELMIRA, JUNE TERM, 1851
Judgment Affirmed, cith Costs Of appel -Thomas
Hamilton vs.. Samuel White and others; Hiram
win VS.. Joseph l.. Palmer; The People Elk. Rel
Smonson VS.. Oliver r. Martins John o. Almgren
VS.. Eugene Dutlish and others; Simon p. HUFF vs.
Shepherd Knapp; James I. Brady VS.: The Super
visors of New York; Benjamin Fl. Meakings vs.
Charles L. Cromwell, John 3 Moore and others
VS.. Michael z. Moore and others; Jeremiah Bession
vs. John IL. Southland and others; John J. Palmer
vs.. Jacob ; Groesbeck and others; Daniel McSaren
vs. The Hartford Insurance Company; Charles f.
Morng, VS. Garret w. Ryckman; Amos p. Stan
ton VS.. William Small; The same VS.. The Same;
Peter q. Borst VS.. Peter Empe, Jr.; Robert Dun
becca Anderson VS.. Jane Bertram John A. Moore
VS.. John 5. Meacham; Isaac A. Biggs VS.. The Peo-
pie Of the State Of New York; Elias Pattison and
Others vs. Joshua L. Blanchard Peer A. Hargous
VS.. The Administrators Of Joel Stone, deceased;
John Smith and others VS.. Fred. A. Helmer and
others.
Judgments reversed, and meu trial ordered, ,ouh
costs to abide the eren Of the sut-JQsiah +. Ken
dali Edward Stone; Elihu Blake vs.. Henry p.
Remsen and others; Alexander Smith VS.. Benjamin
Synes and others; Helen G. Omsted VS.. Robert
Elder; Oliver Beirne and others Claudus Uord;
Peter n: Castillanos VS.. VIM. Jones and others;
Joseph w. Vail and others VS.. John Rice. The
People, ex. rel. Nj. Harlow, admin, &c., VS..
Everett A. Acknowledgements of the Supreme
Court and decision of the Recorder reversed
Gardiner G.. Rowland and others VS.. the Union
rior Court ofthe city of New York reversed in she
particulars to which the appeal relates and the APP
peants declared to be entitled, under the will OF
Jane, Roosevelt, deceased, to those portions of
the estate Of the testator which, by the decree APP
pealed from, were declared to belong to James
Roosevelt Bayley. Benjamin Carpenter and others,
VS.. Cornwell ). Roe and others.-Decree of the SUI
PRIME Court of the city of New York reversed The
conveyance Of Cornwell ; Roe and wife to Corne.
illus '. V. Caswell, declared to be fraudulent aud
cid as against complainants, to the extent of the
life estate of said Roe, in the premises-slid con
veyance is declared to be in trust for the benef; Of
the creditors OF sail Comwell y Roe Alrich Hub
bell and others, vs.. Hiram Carpenter
made at the general term of the Supreme Court re-
versed, and the decree made at the special term NJ
frmed, with costs Of appeal from tue special to
the generl term. Robert Y. Grant VS.. John John
son; The Same Same; The Same VS.. the
Same.-Judgments reversed, and judgments to
be entered for the defendant with COSTS in the court
below. Pulaski Jacks VS.. David b. Nichols DE.
of the Supreme Court reversed and that of the
Vice Chancellorto Supreme Court. Noah Worrall
vs. David Mum and David Nj. Prall.-Decree Of
the Supreme Court v,rsed and the decree Of the
Vice Chancellor affirmed, with costs of appeal from
the Vice Chan cellor to the supreme Court. James
Robertson ar d another VS.. David Caw.-Judgnent
Of the Supreme Court reversed and the decree of
the Surrogate affirmed, with costs of appeal from
the Surrogate to the Supreme Court. David DIFF
fendorf vs. Daniel SPEAKER and ethers.--Decrees of
the courts below reversed, and decree made that the
complainants against the defendants US ex-
ecutors of the deceased, the sum of ( 800, with
interest from the S0th day of March, lSi0 first de-
Quoting nerefrom the sum Of 800, with interest
from the Sth day of February, Is;}5; of sl9S IL.
with interest from the eth Of April, 1926; and the
sum Of 800 l3, with interest from the 18th ofAprl,
1896, with the costs In the courts below Ilill x
Adrch the Mohawk and Hudson Railroad Co.
Re argument ordered
Not Eeeid,d Moss VS.. Averill; Moss vs. Ju ison;
Jewett VS.. Miller; Seqman WyckoG; Brainard
VS.. Cooper; Tucker VS.. Tucker.