New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1852-12-23
TINT day Appeals from orders noted for SATURDAY, vt1
be heard on Friday


SUPERIOR COURT-Dsbrs ysAes PAwA
Sarah Ann McGoaeh ssG G. q. 0unssr ed q Pm
To recover damages, amount laid st 5000.
for injury % ga.insa9 y ssss sAss.sA E. s.csv.s.
with the sewer e house bsing bsls for nr 0safsa
north sidc al FouFteeu1A& Mr.. r. w. - pouus9r
employed Painef says thsf While peasnG thsuaGA -
noT r.ns n % ss s W & .S ss s asse
sncle and ipjuring her hsek, IN Consequence q WAcA
he was for come time sick In defence The sasssssss
sre denied.
II was shown thse plank had been placed Over - @-
excavation the vorsmen leaving L. but wss sa'Ass
during the evening.
The complaint. on motion. wss dismisssd - - hr.
Gunshsr
Webb sst Harlem Railroad Company, i,
To recover damages for personal injury. ~
resdy referred TO- which triea before he Jsry seaa
could nos agree, and were hs,hArgsA
hope Mutual Life Insurance Co. agt Elijah HosGeeaAL
FOR notes given on Life Insurance. plaintiffs eFeen
Tv. o. star Cc'poestoa hayns Il The lime = oncen
iss and lst June lsfS The defence " that the ncee
were given, with Ike amount Ia cash. b. insure the ~
OF defendant Tor the benefit Of his WIFE EhssSeeA s.
find the Company and unable to pay tie prsnham
for the ensuing year, whercpon the Company rcfhssd
to renew the policy and the nctcs and what Aad bsea
Paid were Of no avail 70 defendant On me osher hsnA
Il was scid Mr. H. refused 10 renew, alleging - rsosoa
thai some difficulty had occurred IN pssing up s,ass b
another party.
10 disclose the amount OF their capital when they wik
drew their Office from New.York and did business Acre
ouy to renew their notes. keeping their oice q SAm-
ford. Conn. The insurance IN ls47 aud lsas w. toe
5000
The Court in ifs charge csid there seems b BE- 10 le
gal reason why the Company could not bring he suk
The point whether the inquiries d plaintiff amount
ed 10 tender or not Of the premium for ls{9 VIII be
tho Copr IN dcfsrfu,uR The Jury Viii oE0O
say whether he refused to renew or net and eehS N
verdict for plaina subject 10 the opinon 81 tho Quart
The jury found TINT Mr. H. had not refused vsrsascs
toE plaintiff in amount and interest being $40 ~
Emma Harris agt Thomas Martin.
To recover damages for persons injury csssd by u
horse snd carriage OF plaintiff being struck By sroeers
Sn psDt trawn ont and hurt TIE case VS. Up b.
fore and inqucst taken for plsinun bus oesmb ~
aside The defense principally IL that was tho f.uB q
the person in charge of Mrs. LIS carriage 20
cross ahead of defendants wagon which Il denied. To
be continued
COURT OF COMMON PLEAs--Before Judge DALI.
Alfred Evcrson agt New Haven Railroad Co.
To recover damages Tor personal injury.
amount laid ut 5000 Plaintiff in June ISL, was drsv.
ing in dearborn wagon tho track In the bowcry.
when the wagon struck by four horse bsgga9ecar
upset. and plaintiff considerable injured he slleece
tiat be was for sometime confined 10 his bed, and
brings the present action for personal injury. In
de.ense the difficulty was said TO have oeen caused
by the negligence Of plaintiff himself tho sades q
the dearborn being down, 30 that he couid MOI eco
the car ON the other hand IL was said that there was
10 pcron 70 take charge of the but the driver and
thai If there had been person 10 take charge OF tho
brakes when the plaintiff crossed the track, the car
might have been stopped In time to avoid the collision
Il wos clo denied that the collision was caused cy any
person In the employ OF the New Haven ksifroed
Company but hst the horses and driver @ tao
Harlem Railroad Company, contrae; having been
made by which the Harlem Company were 70 convey
The carr &C che wIsvea Company 70 IhTy sssVna
81 On the part OF plaintiff il was con-
did rot absove them from liability II was shown that
the New Haven cars In the City, are conveyed BY the
Harlem Company end are not under the control Of tho
conductors OF the New Haven Company while passing
10 the point named. The nonsuit was denied Tho
plaintiff Is colored man, and was not owner OF tho
wagon. appeared that he was driving on sne other
short 10 cross the track ahead Of the car The case
is on.
ACTION roR DIVORCE.
James Push agt. Ann Push
Verdict for defendant.