New-York daily tribune., 1859-06-29
COURT OF COMMON PLEAs-srser,L T..a-Ja.. n,
The M.,or AIT. Jane. BS,t and John P.t,isrew

The Mayor agt James butt and Jonn fetuefew
DAILY 1.-THE only point arising I'm tins case "a.
whether the action should have been brought the Of s
real patty and whatever doubts have existed on
,Se CpSr, & Of Appes the case Of The People ss Norton Is
s.d 7s twas held in that case thai an action upon eosA
given BY and It's surety to the people OF hs State W
the certain parties m the estate Of which sos
defendant trustee ws properly Drought 10 tne nans se
People and there nothing ia principle to distinguish that oass
from the present. , ,,, j,
tsined before tie commencement OF the % the
remedy was by the Court aside the procedinsa
h S Conr, and he want Of proof Of thas
fact constituted no ground tcr nous NJ
The plaintiff 10 entitled 20 ucgnent
John Chapman ss, Terence Duffy.
DAILY 1.-The aiidayits IN this case establish, IN my
judgment that the deTnd.n, Obtained the NV,
session vas upon mise To 20 pay sn ,o s% s h ~ %
sysded by shifts and conthyance that the snsss
auent levy upon issued upon ads meet
defendant after the delivery aud after be he'd
put plaintiff under various Pretent. and promes y..
part the design, aud done with the intent Of pro-
an action tha the plaintiff having resosd to such ss.
after the defendants refusal the potatoes which refasa
made having discontinued his seon upon learning Of tAs
Judgment execution and lew, and pr. IN os 70 ss
tnusou scheme enable ID. defendant to
dispose property before hs plaintiff could bring
another rcake IL that that object scsompssed
and the property removed and concealed dpsed Of e or
pryDs plaintiff Of the benefit Of re,skins 1t In action Of
claim delivery and that the case Is oue in which ares.
sFEci.L Trsx-JusE BEFORE Judge DALv
Jose de Silva Maria feneira agt William Depew
The facts in this sufficiently appear IN the opin-
ion of the Court rendered by Judge DAILY The defendant
plies for order dsconnuina this suit and produces rsloass
of s claim and demand the defendant Ia this sctDn
ecud by the wife Of the plaintiff by virtue power of sitor
resisted BY Louis De La Fsanee the ground that tSs
plaintiff formerly member of the hm Of fganere Rsis
Co while be member Of that firm he II g.
Fisaniers firm power attorney ell h
bushes. City ofNew foi q -h..os,er
description the might be- wheiher relating 70 him
member OF the firm OF Fganiee Refs Co.. or Ia his Individual
Of the property OF the hrm and Of the
individual property each member for the benefit of credo
Louis fane The assignment was executed o each Of the
partners three Of them executing In person. and C. Dc
La Fsanere In virtue Of the above powell executing In BE-
half of the plaintiff who In Portugal Ae the sssea
unt Louis De La Pganiee notice OF the assignment Of the
claim In this action to him. which notice before ths
essse and he claims that the % prose-
cut~d for him assignee for the benefit OF credto The sut
Is for q claim belonging 10 the plainah individually.
If power given 10 C. H. De LA FgsIiere was sacisot
property Of the firm for the bene6, of the credo which very
much doubt cannot in Judgment be .H-nded - far 70
.ntite him 10 all the individual property Of the PAntd -
for the payment Of bis debsa power Of attorney
receiving preston and II would be svns e
the authority conferred upon C. fssnere to anssct ell
plaintiffs business. in the City Of NewYork Of whstsever
hod upon sosy the right transfer sn
the property 10 the tstse fof the payment Of h
and opinion c-sts power extensive.
Atwood sgt Manning b. and q. z7s. Hoss sst Smith.
The power by the plaintiff 10 his wife loosely
pressed IL simply appoints her his attorney, with ths ssEets
nigh. Do psmses' rsyns and CONFIRMING ell tia, shs
fully do by virtue II the powell think however, tAst
sufficient authorize her act action IL - gsnsrd
possibly BE- and unless t 10 70 have no elect M sns
conrs power any which not prepared ~ AoA,
IL would authorize such act % sbs has done.
The motion must Be granted