The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1865-08-06

Court OF Appeals--June Terri. ssnx-
Jc6 Andre. "a faowas " Nescomo q &-Asslon IN
the nature OF rspevn for quantity Of undresssd sr
s 81 s q ss.
cused TO him by one Rsy, 30 -~sy~szss,, .
rs OPINION o. rH. COURT ~ suDcs D.uo
the owner OF land may lawfully contract for is cult
ownership Of tho product shall vest In such con-
formance Of condition, or the happening Or an
event, the ownership Of the prodcct shall
conditional sale as the subject matter was no. m s.is
encc the time Of the making the contract Crops 70
Dc raised ere an exception 70 the general rule That
ute 70 properly not In existence cannot be Affected
20 as to vest the same when into existence
In case OF crops 70 be sown the title vests potentially
! subject arises Judgment affirmed
John w'nans et al, appellants, ~ CorbaE Peaks
Of Catharne PEBBLES, deceased 70 set aside deed q
cers premises, Of which 1t is claimed she died sesed.
anu w. by the said Catharine TO her husband. Corbe
PesbIes' rdgment below for the defsndants
rh.a,h,,s. of the husband to take land by convoy.
STATUTE snSs s'U ." , sas voluntary oouvcysno. q
But The ~sIisv Of d. sd from the wife to her husband
may be established by the application Of the principles
Of equity where CONSIDER sonsh. pn nst se e .ss
psovemens made upon tue prem sss IN good faith 70 the
extent Of such equitable claim judgment ,s Of the court
che equities Of the respondent for bis Adyocss 70
ward the land andmprovemeAts mds dppn faith in biz
Gsoys Hs6ma~ Supervisor. hs,ponSsn., OF. The 1ss~s
I~s~ascs 81 Nss Fork, Arps!as -ActSon on a policy
be null void Of ssd property shall boz sold and Goa
veyed," DO.
The effect Of usual proviso against sales policies Of
insurance Ia not nterdct saeaof the owners O. be-
tween themselves, but only sales o. prVpn::SsaZ
persona The dcta to tho contrary in MurdAck =, the
chenango Insurance Company, dsapproyed In the con
broadcast import when they equally appropriate In
limited to the object Of tho parties had in View
whole A' instrument %nsa Where che language Of u.
promiser may be- understood IN more ss ssss
in which had reason to suppose understood By
the promise II be uncertain in view Of tho generA
tenor OF the instrument and the apparent object OF the
parties whether given words used in enlarged o.
in restricted sense other things being equal that con-
structon should be adopted which is most Bono
ncial 70 the promise, Conditions and provisss..
in policies Of insurance to be constructed
strictly against the underwriters, they tes1
the principal obligation Every amendment is to- b
made against construction OF control under which g
would operate snare. When nuctuating stock q
goods was insured by mercantile nrm, and Of its
members retired, was held that goods subsequently,
purchased by the continuing members Of the Arm whs
acquired the interests Of the retiring partner with.
the protection Of the policy The judgment Of this court
Walsh D. The Washington Marine IasuroNe mpa~y-
The action upon policy OF insurance upon the shty
s0 fU sna 10 r.
plaintiff In the court below.
COURT PER JUDGE PORTER
The question whether vessel insured was sec worthy
at the inception Of the voyage s ordinarily one OF The
facts for the Jury. Where the inability OF ship TO per
form voyage becomes evident after leaving port
and founders without Of weather othcr ado
quate OF injury, the presumption Ii that this in
ability existed before setting sail and arose from some
latent defect which rendered the vessel unsoaworthy
But such presumption exists where appears arma
lively that the ship seaworthy leaving port and
that II encountered marine perils such might disable
staunch and we'll manned vessel policy OF insurance
issued on account Of whom II may concern ordinarily
nsures the benefit OF all the owners; and an action
may be maintained in their behalf by the party TO whoo
II is issued. suing in his own name. In such case.
when the inerosts OF the owners are erronously saol
in the complaint tho Court its discretion. may per
init amendment Of the psadings tho trial u co.
formity with tho facts proved Where an tnsure1ee
efectual BY for the benefit OF himself and oehsg
owners Ia fatal objection 70 tho sufcicocy 81
tho notice and preliminary proof, that the otnes
owners do not unite In presenting them. or thes
tho changes In their respective intcrostss are
not stated In the proofs presented by the parry
to whom tho policy issued for the benefit o. al te
owners The provision In policies Of insurance require
notice. proof OF loss and interest To be cxpounds4
literally in favor Of tho insured and is requirements ass
satisfied by furnishing such reasonable evidences - Tie
party at the time, 70 give assurance TO the
underwriters Of his right TO- receive the money ana Of
their liability for oss Tho testimony Of experienced
navigators admissible n questions involving naAsca
which q marine loss Is attributed The jvdgmsns Of
the Supreme Court was affirmed with cost
L n~ IA