New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1852-07-13
Court of Appeals-Decisions.

July 8, l852.-Present Ruggles, Chief
Judge; Gardiner, Johnson, Edmond', Watson, Weles,
judges.
TIE Court of Appeals, at the conclusion Of the argu
nen Of No so yesterday adjourned sine dte AFTER the
delivery Of the following opinions:
Whuc vs. heYTin.-An agent who has mis- ed his prin.
cpal by misTeprs senation OF material fact whereby
The prRcpa has incurred expense and suffered loss 10
liable 10 bis principal In action for the damage thus sus-
timed
Judgment reversed, and awarded for plaintiff, on de-
EurTtr, With costs
Of error where none was allowed before not being re-
respective express terms does not apply 10 JUG
nen rendered before the enactment Of the statute.
Kft Of error qusshed.
kd never existed thereiore statute allowing an appeal
btls Court having been repealed Without any saving
clause appeal taken pursuant 10 II cannon DC heaiu
h here is law giving the Court ursocuoh 10 near
4 for instance In the case OF Judgment below award
hsanew trial. Appeal dismissed without costs.
hsosioav admir-, ps Carroll eI'r.-An administrator,
s,onteo In this State the estate OF person VINO
VA domicied and died in another State, leaving Will
snder which an executor duly qualified in the place OF
h douic though ancilary To the executor has yeIthe
ga title 10 bona nOtabiG existing In this STATE, aud
t0lec.able here, which the executor cannot deprive
hin Of by any release the debtor or transfer OF the
demand II not appearing bur that there are creditors
Il he deceased resident 10 this State, whose claim on
he fund, In the hands Of the administrator would be
superior 10 that of the executor or his assignee Judg
ni reversed with costs In the Court below" and tnaI
pAniif have the relief prayed Tor. ,
Lymsn HO!oOn vs. FritHd H0LcOmb. -Although the
County Court has jurisdiction in the subject matter for
hance for of action under the Judiciary act'
which hes been held to be constitutional, yet u not APP
pairing on the record that the Court has Jurisdiction OF
Ne person, the objection is fatal on appeal Judgment
nTeTsed, aud judgment tor the defendant below, WIN
cot
Martin vs. Srahda-On appeal from decree IN
tegy II appearing as matter of fact that the properly
qebt 70 be reached Ia the suit did not belong 10 the
hsnea, debtor the order Diminishing the bail Affirmed
peh costs >. .,
GyiRsg vs BebeG-There not being any iina adJud
sarO in the suit the appeal dismissed with tut costs
Ro0ay6,,s VS. ROSeRdGle MaReflciUrtHS COMPaay-
Where the act of incorporation OIL I'm
paw euacts that the stockholders shali DC PerSouay
bile for il debts aud authorizes any creditor 70 sue
h stockhold,rs on proof that the demand has peso
pesepted 10 the proper officer and payment has oeen
io,e6 a. IA not necessary that Judgment sn0Gd mrs!
kerecoyered by creditor against the COMPANY "A
s0eh case, bl OF equity may properly DC eI u ' 20
t instance against the Company ana one or more OF
ee stock ders be cause apporuOnment OF ihelr tol'
usmong themselves cannot be made IN sun az az.
dgnen OF Superior Court reversed, aud judgment al
Steclsl Term affirmed with costs la the Court below,
Saaderson vs. GoodtciR --Nnere, IN deed, the
e0nses end distances the quantity OF lana cSlveytu'
tri the description By certain nSed monuments 90 not
asr.e the monuments control aud override the other
psrts Of The description. Judgment reversed and ne"
shsl awarded costs l. abide The event.
Doir VS. Wyk0F.-ln an action for seduction ot pam
rs. daughter where she the servant of defendant
hupd by articles Of apprenticeship signed by the father
he esnI. maintain the action, because toe re auon o.
Esser and servant on which alone tue acaon Is ionni
Cd does not exit between him aud his daughter JUG
ntn, reversed aud new tia awardedi cOsts 70 soidt
Tt event
Ertn,y, Roo,-Iu an action by consignor agalns
seop,iguee tor not obeying instructions, II appeared
thst the ip,tulctons were % sell on arrival, ana Ia'
eobsgnee not sell because be could Dol ge' 'ne a.
ke pTice; and Il was held tbat the cCnsgnec vas Aoe
because In his Instructions he was not iineea - az
price but was Instructed absolutely To sell on a'tVS
Judgment reversed and new Trial AWARDED costs
ABIDE the sveIt
Bdivs L1Rea-Wheu a debtor bad applied Tor
dsehsrre uaer the bankrupt Law, and WAS opposed o
some Of bis creditors who made agreement wisn "a
thern law Of the bankrupt that they would "iinlia'
their Opposition upon his executing hiA prOussory noe
for portion of The debts which 10 be eit Ia escfoN
and e be delivered the opposing creditors soon
tie discharge should be obtained Hell that the note
void cannot be enforced because ntraud OF N
benkrvp, law Judgmen, Of Superior Court reversed
and new trial awarded; costs 10 abide the event.
S4tess vs. Armstrong. Where third person put
Chased Of defendant box which the purchaser Vas
send for and which he Old send for by his porter WI
was directed by the defendant thar ne would ind II J
bis loft and the porter in lowering II down from the d.
PENDANTS of by the deiendanfs machinery, let u "A
upon the plaintiff who vas Injured thereby held "a
defendant was not liable for such injury, a. the porte
IN no respect his servant Judgment Reversed an
rev Trial awarded costs 10 abide the evens.
M,siek vs. HeE-Where the teststOr devised MS re