The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1852-07-13
Supreme Court-spcsial Term.

Decisions by Hon. Judge Edwards.
July IL Fanny BydssH the NeU jersey Railroad
Transportation Company. There is not such a prepon-
derancc Of testimony in favor Of the defendants upon
any the questions fact which were to the
jury as would authorize the Court TO set aside the YER
dict The question to the liability of the defendants
on the ground Of their alleged connection with the Pha
dephia and Transportation Railroad Company fairly
presented 10 the jury under the rule laid down In Cham
pion vs. Bostwick as Wend 175). think that the
legged negligence Of Mrs Carman The fifth proposition
which the Judge requested to charge specified
by him was correctly presented to the jury hc motion
Tor new trial Ia denied
BREACH or PROMISE OF MARRIAGE
Mary Kipp Miles Smih.-It seems to me that
there sufficient evidence in the to chow that the
gard to time If that was the case time was not Of the
Of the contract 1t is true that the defendant
that time arrived he gave the pantia distinct notice that
he would marry her As the original contract did
not specify any time for its performance the plaintiff
general refusal TO perform Mt any time think that for
these the Judge before whom the case was tried
vas Tht a ~ 81 70 IN hs the t But
lie stated in substance that II they believed
that the defendant had promised to marry the plaintiff
cover although the action commenced before that
day provided that they believed that notice had been
he met thc s
had told the jury that II they found that the defendant
had made general promise without reference to time
mencement Of the suthe would have been correct but
the jury not called upor to pas upon this question
The only contract which was submitted to them was
only cont act which made the time Of performance
essential part Of IL If the defendant agreed to
marry az pa fticular time and that the only
tact, can no reason Why the plaintiff could bring
her action before that time eny more than upon any
other contract Of which time Is the essence. Motion
for new trial granted. Costs 10 abide the event.
LIBEL srrr
Ieoge r. Stanley u.s. James Vatscn Web5 There is no
doubt that tie publication alleged in the complaint is in
tseflbellous The defence which set in the answer
does not bring l. within the class Of privileged communi
cations as II mere poye preliminary complaint
Phelps. Duncan Thwaites D. and G. 565) Besides,
this publ alton which is set forth in the complaint
contains than stated in the complaint made
before the magistrate Demurrer overruled with costs
Decisions by Hon. Judge Roosevelt.
july 12-Pierre Chanieen &C., vs.. Plat adams, &c
This il motion to strike out disregard the answer
lous and also for summary judgment that ground for
the relief demanded on the complaint. 1t Is except
tonal proceeding and like all such proceedings, gives
rise doubt The action being founded ON a common|
promssory note the Issues Of fact il any arising on It
would according TO the constitution be triable by al
jury But this motion instead of pursuing the ordinary
method seeks to withdraw the trial from that tribunal
and to have the issues determined pate afavit
by single Judge What Is sham answer The coded
since the amendment Of 1852 declares that the ruled
by which the sucency OF pleadDgs Is to be determined
those prescribed by this act And yet, although
prohibiting sham pleadngs find IN no rule 70 deter
understanding ofthe term as gathered from the author
ties must therefore be our guide The motion must
denied without costs and with leave to demur reply
twenty days or TO to make the dehni
4 and certain as the plaintiff may be advised.
Eui6rd Iiotces and Others, John ID. Wood and ors.
Motion TO set aside report of rcferec.-These notion
like those set aside verdicts Of uries no. to be
couraged The authorities uniformly especially the NOR
recent lay down the rule stropgy to that efec
still where clear Of either Of Law Of fact
II made out the Injured party l. entitled to redress Tn
report IN this must be confirmed provided the plain
TINS consent to rellnqush much Of the amount
arises out OF the charge for commissions to
referred back for correction.