The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1852-10-11
Supreme Court-speciaI Term.

OcT 9-In the matter Of r. ID. Smith Knopp and SuioH-
is that the defendants Smith and Knapp may be com
PEELED to pay to the plaintiff rent Rom the time that
tce OF the assignment Is alleged TO have been given to
them that smih and Knapp have not appeared and had
allowed Judgment TO by default recovery might have
been hao against them frsm that time Yet The plaintiff
had right rent from that time but only for such
rent as accrued after the actien commenced The
defendants right then IN appearing and in putting
TO sho that Smith and Knapp were in arrears for rent
when the action commenced and the referee finds
this against the plaintiff The defendants therefore
light in attending the reference They ought then to be-
paid their costs in the action the plaintiff having
claim against them except lessee of his debtor and
they beng ready 10 pay either as the Court might direct
There extraordinary litgat befDe the
TO induce the Court investigate how much of
the expense referee caused by matters in which
Smith and Knapp succeeded. and how much IN those
in which they tailed or whether the referee found
perry against them or not when he reported in fact
aaansy them They should. therefore, their full
costs and the order must he that these be
and deducted from the sum TO be paid by them they
have been very slow in moving amend the judgment
as TO have their costs allowed TO them aud they make
imperfect for the delay but still the is snf
hcien seeing that the delay has caused injury to the
plaintiff Cowenhoven the principal debtor opposes the
confirmation OF the referees report the alleged ground
that this suit settled about May l. 1852 lie and his
son swt settlement and that the due
adjusted at S94S aud and half Of
was to be secured by bond they call Of the father and
pay able years and $500 vas
actually paid TO plaintiffs counsel by Sutton Of the
essees The plaintiff and his counsel the agreement
that half the S94S should be secured by the CON
estion OF Judgment OF the defendant and biz payable
in one and two and the rest with the costs in cash
and that the judgment IN this action to stand
curity that the judgment accordingly confessed by
T. u. Cow nhoyen and his son, and 1898 33, paid
to plaintiffs counsel. by sutton the lessee but
that tine deepdent Cowenhoven mad given
Smith and Knapp would also pay $3.50 that Smith aud
Knapp refused 10 pay that wthou. deduc,ng 500 for
Their costs The plaintiff says that this pa an end TO
the arrangement Yet after this the 1888 49,
ceved from sutton by the plaintiff counsel and consent
given h which the ASTON discontinued to him
This shows that the money was received in part peror
therefore be also creoit.do d. Cowenhoven of May
10 1862 wis paid the discontinue as
to Sutton given and the amount reported referee
as due to D. CoweDhovcn must be reduced accordingly
Ii the paipti SAY Judgment in this action was
10 remain security II consistent With the continu
ance of the TO settle that the pan should
go in With the reference in tins action when Smith aud
Knapp refused TO pay the s25e without deductiug their
costs and that I Coweuhoven ana his counsel should
assent TO this in order hat the III payment
might thus be obtained from Smith aud Knapp 1t ap-
pears from the sffdavt on behalf Of the plain M that
rome harh feeling has between the plaintiffs
COUNSEL aud tie defendant j. Cowenhosen. This
nay very naturally have led 70 Misunderstanding
even OF he agreement between this parties difficult
to recor ellie The retention Of the 1858 80 and of
Judge ment confessed iy ID g. and by his who
fesod il only surety Tor him With the entire
ation by The plantn Of the agreement TO settle. Az,
however, the plaintiffs counsel Understood appears by
his affidavit that this action continue aud the
agreement b. rescDd.d it msy be proper sos judge
to be entered here dec uciipg The 1888 49, as above
the painti delivering up the confession o. jgdge.
ment and giving proper release 10 ID. Z and hi, SON.
theefrom entering in his final order that tue
against HIM; neither party TO have against the
ether these motions neith Is entirely in the right
Marine Court.
Before Judge Cowes.
Der 6-.9rdrep Canary Herman ID. Meschenctorf.--
his was an action brought To damages for in
uries Inflicted plaintiffs horse by the defendant.
shown by Mr. John Fogerty that on the lith of Juue
ast the plaintiff horse bad Deen left standing outside
feed store ut No ~ Marion street by the plaintiff
who tie act of entering the store when the
f.pdant drove rapidly down the street grocery wagoo
having spripg attached to the wagon. His
and wagon passed the plaintiffs cart out the of
the wheel OF the spring struck agant that OF the
whee If the plaintiff and threw the horse Of the
latter his head amongst bates of hay which
ing the gutter. lie no sever immediately raised
up uuipued when the defendant lahed his horse vio
lently while bis clerk Jumned out Of the wagon and
seiz1DR the hor.es head urged him forward fhe de.
,ndants horse thus incited sprung forward aud
hurled the plaintiffs horse aud out into the bales Of
hay On being tax up his leg round TO be ripped
open from the fstlock to the knee and his breast
also severely inJui ed 1t shown that SIS paid TO
aveeriDary for attendance the horse-thl,
be idle for weeks aud that the plaintiff averaged
with him $50 pr moGth For tns defence it
tended by MIR James Grdiey. that the plaintiff aloue
iu fault he had LETT his horse standing part
of the street which already partly obruced by
bales Of hay-tbat he had refused when called
upon to do by the defendant and tnat in any event
the plaintiff could ii the defendant convicted
Yer nothing oDd the depreciation OF the
The Court charged the july that If the plaintiff at
all negligent he could not otherwise that ne
should recover such would coupe him for
Of $50.