New-York daily tribune., 1858-12-14
coupr OF COMMON PLEAS Dec il-Beforo Jzdse
W nay BRADY and HtLroS.

Tt.ysvyort Aesaeuy Of M1si, ,st Jas II. Ta,Iet-
TLis soit was brought to recover 5000 on con-
tract made op the 27th Of Septe ber 1854, by which
The plaintiffs agreed to lease the Aclemy Of Music to
deferdsnt for ia o months at 60 800.
Dtfeudsbt set up that the plaintiffs did not finish
the Academy according 10 t. cir asceemept in conse-
Quenoe Of which IT vas vi fl for use, ant that Mario,
one Of the artists he had engaged, became III there
fOm which prevent. biln from Appearing in tn ope-
ras, 10 tie damage ci defendant tue Of $500
which he claimed to reeoup from the relt alleged to
BE- due from him to plaintiffs. verdict rendered
for the pllntffs FOR s 63i IL. Subsequently Judge
1nerahan, at Special Term, d'n'ed motion fJr new
trial, from winch defendant appealed TO the General
Tenn which recently reversed the decs on ct Jec.a
Torn, ana ordered Il new trial.
Tie following opinion of the Court will be read with
interest:
BFApy, J.-Tbe testimony does ret show tha. any
6emsnd fof The nsis 1t alleged IN the complains
thst which scoTod the 18th days Of Oco
Sess dec 1T Is admitted IN IL. reply tba, % .S6aH be de
At as time Of the dsys on hitch he rsp, iel QUE
demanded, but that the ftn Of November 1884,
and AZ ABOUT o. that day, M Paine, who acting
behalf Of the oirec,oGs Oi tie Academy Of " lsic
e. par iVnl..n 20 ens , te Ss,1.T ana 4.
from Mr. Pbals5, the Presde.t Of the Academy
ing TO orders ockeo doors AID did allow
From this Of the evidence 1.
took possession Of the blons eion Of excluding
purpos carried out Tie agreement contained provision
es 70 lows: konpay Of Icnt 10 forfeit lease " but
well settled that on e.ses oonDins similar covenant
sn or condition, the landlords Ight % reentsr is not per
fected utu lie Uases demand OF the precise due
for rent at toe timo snd place required by law. THe
demand must be made ou tho premises oa. the day
con Henispn. II John 40 Leon, 3 Fabian aud Wiad
sors case, s. q Gro Ebz, 2s Kaweey Brand, Gro Ex
Wsr6 80 Van Reosselscr vs. Jeett 0eno in Jon, vs.
ssnd doe. not show ecmpbanoe VITA the ow because i.
eppean that the precise sum due o demanoed Toe de-
f.udeet der the sseement entitled 10 credit of 26
a. admitted by The r,gy But even II the demand was IN
until nSnst d the I'll 4I EoSoasI ' rne bad 2o
whole day IN which to pay he rent and until The day e1Pi
KidSeiy VI, Braid Gro Eia' %, Co Liz; " 2'i as
MS., MSSf and oHy' W.S 'I; Term Ep IL Sv'S vs.
mon o. the pIe.i.s' wa, M deliberate iHtsriIsnss =,
G s.I TIE esieDGs T P Ss & c w9a h1 S,a w Of
sr.e. 81 Lucseyy rrant1kse. / T. D. smith os I've
Lioydyi TomI kiD., 8. r. 67 Cohen v. D1po sand
= o @ M P r. M ah asS sncS e'og d a.
the which had already accrued (MsKeon VS. whitney
ages by such eVc'on yoa of agreement
Of hiring .nd III sbst mel Of tne CTne Mayor g..
ta,on vi snroUnccd f Morday Nov and That Incurred
nest expense BY bills therefor improp
s1ly rejected. For reasons without reference y the
questions IN the trial b. ordered Il
dece 10 how tSSt Mario wa ,sk sch 10 co.'s quen5e
plaintiffs del4 in finishing the building after the TOOK
possession The otienost hrtd tnc pegs, Tor hs purpose
Of evi operate renuents ~ winch Mario and G ae
insnssenent II the defendant brought them In the
antuege of Mr. Payne the paints witness aud the pni tis
olcc Vm oHe ON tBs ist October following Ths p's1
tfs al, diligence in hushius the blltlas
which the defendant agreed to sGcept II its unfinished
state and this faihng 10 hsve contemplated the
erection of fifteen rusces ior tue Of hestiag The
hous. On the l6n Of OCT the sther cod sud but
furnaces order Mario snd Gr aud the andeue COM
ylscd the oodness of the hou.e Nj rsiae ken to
nhoD, and went Of Mario and Gisi TnCy
p.pei that it bitterly cold .ad they had in -
Peter had 'xpehenced suoh cd there Il w,'
also pIOveo thAt s1cient number o m oSu nave . n
the wtoe fitetu furnaces 10 tvo dy' aud IT ne hat tls
furnaces competed un the 10Th q November taee
conflicting test this fube ana tee cohc!uohs
inevitable eydei that tbe anhs oId rot use a e
eence nih the bndrg. The defend ait offered
facts
Mario wss bic eoIinspce and
tina, during h: pert irmanrc he was .Neu wlih cold aud
prevent his ,aips through perf,rm.
that such cold ard AZ Sc exclusively from the
eoress oh .arpuess Of the house. aud hit n col mess aud
resulted oa the neglect OF the plant n Z? hlsn ne
bnSng and TO pu, in order ano that Maros IL
mess continues sboat Weets, curing whco tim The de-
fndan entirely d,Fi.ed Of his scoes, ana Loot great
gslns and profits there6y oink Tie syssnee % mould ,
direct consequence Of the nescot OF the paHtfs -
hnh the bu lang or TO erect tae iaiaa'es, Susa a.,
truth must be- ss.umed In Ford IS Munroe 10 W,d liO
etc son brought for the Derenc. ~
t deen dants servant IN driving gs over t' p ntIs so
by which killed and addition TO loss 81 service ne
plaintiff permitted 10 the damages oocasoned By h'
Wes sickness p,equcnt upon the accident Justice Nron
been the If the principal act complanea o.
aud came within the w,lettrd rule respecting sQecA! u@
age. Damage actually sustained bat "bch 90 "o
as from the act conn autd o ana consequent are no, ~
Mid bv the law may nevertheless be recovered properly
(squeT Ooui IA Wen. 1885, Armstrong " PEI
~ Nen The beneficial enjoyment of tie plnlirs
nyenss bv lie defendant depended the ability oi r AZ
ts,s enployed by h 10 perform the different parts assasd
them, spdn hst abiiH tS los sbona BE- horne by
hen II seems h,t the sickness Of Nsr resulted directly sd
irnmedaely nom negligence want of d,nsSo,e - & e
part psUts aud less re'ot" ihaa 'He a. ass' "
plaintiff VI lie n Ford Monroe, Tga
think the judgment should be reversed sud rsm I!h t
dsrsd with costs to ABIDE the event
<-nrpr ny coNvOS pTv.SDvc "a sp,s,ye lrsse