New-York daily tribune., 1851-07-15
LAW COURTS.
superior Court MONDAY. July II.
Before Chef Justice Oakley.

EdIci1 Forrest agt Catherine Forrcst-
The motion on behalf Of Mrs. F. 20 require W. F.
TO fIe IN the Court Of Common Pleas q: Paiatei-
Phia. withdrawal of the suit entered there oy him
i'r divorce at alnsi AirS F. or that he De- pr0aoNei
from proceeding IN the cross-sult enterei ~ HIN
against her here was aryletby Nr. O'ConorfOr Ms.
F.. and Mr Van Buren, opposed. The later sad
MI r. had entered 1e cToSs-suit here bV invitation
OF counsel OF Mrs F, on the supposiion tha! the
SUIT entered by her asans; him, and the now en-
tered by hIn against her should be tri-i Together
but he counsel now wish To make ilemdstlnct. 1t
was denied that Il Wa by IuvIta;iOn. but ~ SlyEes
ton OF lie Judges 1t the time Mr. Van 8ren
cOutenced that Ms Forrest should with raw
the complaint for injunction IN the Supreme
Court, and pay the costs or permit the suit catered
here 10 go or, and be trIei or the same issue Tse
one SUIT does not charge IN relation TO al the parties
that the other does Mr. 0COnnOr SaldtwO names
omitted, but that they were also omitted n Nr
= 5 answer to Mrs. F'S bill. He dlscaimet any
want of good faith on the part Of counsel of Mrs. F.
and was opposed to The two suits being tackled TO-
Cether like the >ianese twins The Court II J: sees
IT. can perhaps order the two TO be trled tOgeheror
the Gue StonS IN them may be, perhaps IN fact
though with some little additional form. be decliet
N the finding OF the Jury nthe rlal of the complaint
and answer IN the suit entered by Mrs. F.. but her
counsel prefer them separate. The bill IN Supreme
Court as TO injunction also comprehends other points
such as decree for malnienance-the $500 al
lowed Mrs. F by Nh F. not being w decree OF
Court. Decision reserved
James Mason, admin Of John Mason,
r. dereaScf. agt Georre and Isaac Jones' and others
Mr.. NJ. Jr.. died Al Staten Island IN september
last. and his brother James administered upon his
estate He filed a complaint against MeSSrs. Jones
sons n-law and executors of the late John Mason
the elder and other heirs at law OF latter claiming
that John Mason Jr, was entitled to oneeghth part
of his fathers estate, denying the validity OF the
fathers WILL and brings charge for 10 years rents
and profits. The present Is a motion asking the
Court 10 frame issue 10 be trled by Jury. as 10
whether the late John Mason the elder, OF sound
q >poslng mind on the day IN 1882 he gave paper
writing purporting 10 be his Will. lhe died IN that
wear whether he did or not, direct the disposition
o. his property a alleged IN said paper writing and
whether undue influence had been exercised, &c.
rJohn Mason Jr It Will be recollected, was an al
legged lunatic, and the VIII left certain amount a
wear for his maintenance
The motion for an issue 10 be tined by jury IS or-
posed, on the ground that James Mason. the plair-
tiff brought SUIT after his fathers death, conte>tng
the trusts IN his fathers Will, and the Courts, IN
cudlng the Court of Appeals. sustained the trusts.
and held that the validity Of the VIII of his father
was reasonably involved IN the controversy a. the
basis of action on the trusts, and he vas perna-
nenty enioned afterward from cOnteStlng the valid
lty of the will as was Mrs. A, his sister she being
defendant In the former suit. and acQulosclng IN the
validity of the will It IS also contended that the
preSent complaint cannot be sustained, as Mr. James
Mason the plaintiff, makes himself defendant
among the other heirs at law The motion was ar
cued by Mr. Ring for plaintiff and Nr. Bidveu op-
posed. Decision reserved