New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1856-05-06
LAW INTELLIGENCE.
SUPERIOR CoURr-srroAL Tras-MAr S-Reforo Jsdsc
BoswoRTH.
ICA


sIAspFR-JUsTIyIcAIIoy-
Ormsby sgt Dousss
Wien the answer 10 q complaint IN an action ot
ssLder escb ard allegation OF the comednt AMI
then up Qualification the Court will not compel defend
III, ctL,r The, ar. not necessarily incoDsent both be
The Court not on motion decide thsi o'th are not
Ise ,., cam B.. an so.as u,ay g.
lenses IS be hs, he % by the desh absence upper
Should ho B. pernt,ed 70 h. tenea.
% sqs Is, b fas s. Si
tie cfense the mpue. AL that defendant can provs II
T.t b, iniseoeeton or impe
lion wto heard him. NAV result In ,estno est
th ~ a Il contrary to dec darts conviction Of the it
shall Re proved be GA speak them when be d not ,as
be should Be- compelled to eIpersy sdm tbs n 'pote
The only question submitted being ~beh.r an sn'wer which
denies eli iLs Of the complaint e,us.o o pefea
10 cosn the csf.n.e hi. jushcs ion am The Court bel
OF the opinion that !, can hs motion denied hu' bout
cot, to either party rue ana '"Ph '0'
AMENDED CoxPLAIST-PLBADING.
Hammond at. LeaL IN .,. r,.
.nsnsed eo%Il.in. p.s.sasd Tor
and refusal. and duo notice to the
h.: before vas presented e. and ,:s s
1 for value hat is would MOI Be- .cceed
S INV Gi .i ~eG OH no, SS. of .
he stricken ont and that plaintiff elect which ne will retain
the rsIf upon AFFIDAVIT sLd cory OF proposed amended
con order ths the defendant 'ho- cause
the SO day Of pill 1885 why plaintiff should not DO allowed to
After ..rcs Of such oIs s.v; and DTopTs .n 1s.s
.hu.: admit due eTys Of and .;eeR copy Of the o 1.f.
"sosis Of motion to amend today or to-aorow("
The copy accepted of the al ended complaint on
Wm n. Tsssard. for no ! a. R Dyett, eostra.
Held That both Of the srounas o. oeSvs % I'm s.T
That the sceeptaree u the .mendsa complaint in m pens
iorm 'ucb acceptance Is an answer
to this otion late object to Il tor matters OF mere
form although may be demued too deemed 10 Do BAD In
BILL OF NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS..
Depew at LssL
In an action brought after dissolution of part
Of the sn wa nuss sssins hi. partner
ms Judgment that either who might be found indebted
spcsOn Of The cef.ndat viii order all book, and
lbs 70 The business to be dePosteo go th. thy may Pc w
be t.ien bu, not AFTER tina; ha. BEEN dons oreeIs
to be fni.ho See is Of the code does not appy
state Of fses UL.s such plaintiff mai % aim oI
s f the entries upOl the book. Of the frm one p.Insr
bs. e.unpyey Heh knowedse Of details as The ots,
Ts furnish bull Of paItou to furnl.a copy OF tne
bcol WLtn the pes5ns show that made the ns-
i are .ash. The should 5.
directed to particular aDactions and the mvns .hdsvits
showing The proprety Of srsrinr it Motion denied wh ~
pntH abide the r. Dyeu for PLAINTIFF
VIZ. II. Tssssrd for defendant
NOTION FOR ISJCyoTIoS AND RgcElvER-coSTRicr.
SHAW and Davis sst PsrfsL ,
Plaintiffs move for injunction and receiver Wheh
81 lot, sells them builder and aees 70 ADVANCE
more, to AID erecting houses thereon and the eu der ssee
rsts hem 3, dsy named sd that the owner AID vsntOI
Esy puehs~ materials to be used In erecting the aonses 20
deed when lie hou.. are fnss sIS eI.cat. mortgages b.si
for ID. as.s,e Of the price Of the lots and TIE ~
tlu hi, may employ Henee; and ia
hh The hoases the builders or on ten days ee
and 0O.e ns.r.' and the builder s. 70 perforn his con
r,ei eeees yroce ed with the steeti'n Of zoe %
OIL
val not for that appoint receiver -h poss' % n.,
flh hem ), On sclee, y ss employed By himself :hs
contract provides, to sell the iners oil ne oaHdef e's
'he builder will proceed and hHish The soases an.e
be eHoined from Interfering 70 prevent hn ,ena. i
Sopt he builder will se eij9usd fton ENG ~
ttrD The nateis bought or using them Stas!wss ma "a
@ ne hoe.s Tse vendor ~. shI.e sn9.oa INTO he
t9r,e' E'y fsrn.h fthe bai!er does 10, use ias q ~
eihe he houts and the veudo proceeds 70 nalsn ~
az nl.ei snpoyed for hat purpos The a@st s WI en-
loled non Interfering 10 prevent The sIes'eou ION
sirs esaee and shs ~ a. ipanet W granted without
q ins notion 70 erherpery JLsrOeaa' for P'ntH' James
New Yi Ledge No iOf the Order Of Tenpa 49, Wolf and
Plaintiff may amend complain. in tea days, on pay
int on the thereof the costs OF th- A -res h
'Dd Ct tbe subsequent rroeeedins and 's'eA dollars s0s
opre-ins the motion.
COURT or COMMON PLEAs-srserIL rrsS-Mir s.
Before Iudse DAILY.
ryIDEscR-ApxrssIoSs OF THE uspER-sHERIrr RE-
cIrvABLE TO CHARGE TIE sHERIFF-DIsrS-
GUisHED FROM DEPuTr-sHERIrY.
IboHs Hop, ct o., at Thomss Carniey sserf ts
lie duties Of the Sheriff are transacted by The Un-
esr-shet In th0se where tie s5eri re-
9viIsd se Watson Sher q ~ ami the ses
and sdp ssiops " the Under shsrr while In oce
In al matters relating tie general eooduet snt
o. The shenf oee OF is dnrss bad
rt ptn the Sbenf. villa So 7. 4 ll5, PHI ET Ca y
sCo~ens Hills SD
ereh admissions receivable in evidence, not upon ne
ground thar Re has eemn6d the shefa bu: o-esnss e '
agent or Of that ocs aGhossd 10 40
Sfce-
Biz position v-sy different fro that Of Depu,J -:
rhoee limited the execrtcn OF proSess s.sG
hai Dc 10 esties bv tho Soers or ohs x.
But hs Urdsr Sheriff. eutes 10, limited ~ ,s.r %
cept Ia few essea TIE, BE- perfof per 90
or pes~pee OF Dr. sL.ss asiess be tA-ns
sss,ne The dire the particular thss adsiors as.
A., receivable 70 charge the 50. u On ,d BY
bsi thcse q president Of ~ - hussss Of -