New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1866-10-11
CIVIL COURTS

|
CIVIL COURTS.
SUPREME coURT-CrRcgIT-Ocr lO-BefOre Mr.. Justice
| AN INSURANCE IhBROGLlO.
Leonard Appeby ct al agt The Fremens Fund Insurance
| Company. .
This has already been tried once in the Circuit
before Justice Foster who dismissed the complaint IL was
seht back s a retria mainly in relation to the origin the
fire in question and to whether any portion of the premises
question were used for purpose not recognized I'D INC on
Plaintiffs it seems leased whole Of the building at No 800
Peas and used the lower portion OF 1t for the storage OF
tobacco They effected two assurances on their stoekons
ne Aston Ere Insurance cc%PSny for e. Geo and tSs Onf aes
nsurances the building leased by certain parties
chairs vanishing them Sc The plaintiffs tenants Of
these parties and continued 10 occupy the lower portion
other than tobacco 1t claimed by defendants that they were
not notified las they claim they ought 70 nave h
S Soa anu That IN consequence p"n"'i' f''
The loss Of plaintiffs BY fire that took place subsequent 10
these changes amounted to sl90 - and the poYofuVn
claimed by them from defendants including interest W aa
After testimony by one Of the Mess ApTleby the plaintiffs
Mr. VIM NJ Evarts on behalf OF defendants, then made
Of the case to the jury eoncndng that the Plaintiffs
had violated their policy which had been issued simply to IN
SSn sSSd on t 9T% e. mott notifying
hazardous business having subsequently been "a
relation the defendants assumed the building whether az
essees simply tenants they were bound 70 ho,y ' m
PENDANTS these changes which increased the s ana core
nnt woum have caused an addition to the premium. and
that the FIRE in question caused o me prosecution Vi "c
bus ness in the upper portion Of The building ,
Mr. then read evidence in support Of the points 90
vaneed by him and called witnesses ana insurance n r
insurance policy for parties TO net IN relation thereto az pun
II WAS eontendcd by Mr. James Gerard behalf OF the
plaintiffs that they notobged under the circumstances
This case notify the company 1t would have been nme
policy place plaintiffs not bound TO take cognn
business their tenants their landlord that sus
soeoed neglect yitieted he insurance policy u Sona &c
useless 10 obtain one the plaintiffs not bound TO look aer
the interests defendants and anlt Is found WIN mem
in this he believed would be impossible for The d.,ens me
prove that the parties who occupied the upper portion % n
building did prosecute buness more hazardous IMAM III" WV
eimonT was in relation Of
the IRE agreement in this policy and the s'neui % "
rum ''''' CgAynrs-Before Mr. Justice CLrRkE
OPERATE ARTISTS IN COURT.
Animal Biacoh agt. John +. Schepelcr and another 49,
The pantia in this suit claims on 90 of United States $40
bonds which alleges he deposited with the deiendans as
to him The defense in mi. case Is 6s that the bonds
were altogether the property Of the plaintiff but Of the
posted them for purpose procuring joint credits Mex
leo they obtained from the defendants credit OF u 600 n
Mexican coin which however gold being over e. NJ cost WIN
commissions and expenses and small oyerpy nen made 70
the plaintiff on another account more than so ana lnat
has suit brought by him attached the very bonds
The up yesterday motion TO reserve II t Jan
nary next ground Of his absence from the city and his
expected with the opera troupe in that month The de
PENDANTS opposed this motion the ground that hafoen
soon TO H. plaintiff had been Guilty Of great
iGchrs in not having testimony IL important taken
mission and that they should moi be compelled to take Their
witnesses testimony till the plaintiff evidence given ~
they might know what they had 10 meet They further
claimed that there bad faith in the application The PLAIN
tiff last had sought to hurry the cause on the short cal
endar.
The Court reserved its decision
SUPERIOR COURT-TmAL TEmi-0cr lo-Before Justice
JOINS.
THE LAW OF NEGLIGENCE AS APPLIED TO CITY RAIL
WAY PASSENGERS
Moses Dayton by guardian eg The Fast broadway DTy poes
and Battery Railroad Company.
The plaintiff i'm this case, q boy OF about IL years
old was according the evidence given on this ta go@ ON
the defendants cars To Scainms About block rom Seai
asked the conductor stop when be got there The
conductor told the boy Why you are smart enough 10 l
from tte forward platform while the ear was moving rapidly
and slipping the over him. breaking hls reg ia Two
On the paniif resting defendants counsel moved for
the ground Of contributing negligence the part
that the leapng from % while in motion was negligence
which would compel the Court 10 set aside any verdict Tor The
plaintf. and therefore was ground for non-suit ,,
cOnended for the plaintiff that the question OF whether
action Negligent for the jury on all The
qued child from admit snd that the direction 81
the conductor and Its weight on The mind OF e 10y Nas 20 e
considered estimating whether the boy had acted with proper
After the citing of case in the Court Of Appeals show
that required of infant as from an adult
the Court held with the defendants and dismissed the con
MI Sidney 3 Harris for the plainH Mr. scribner and j.
LONG SHORE DIFFICULTY.
wm Evans agt. Robert " Hand and another.
The plaintiff what he claims ag
grayae assault He is ongshorcmcn and be states went
board the schooner America on the nth OF August le
between and to ask for work when he went on boatd
OF projecting almost between the up
rights OF spike driver when be- thinking TO do the captain
showed the boom of The captain sprung at him got
him W and with the assistance Of the nate the other
defendant knocked him down and kicked him cutting HIM
head On his examination II appeared
that had been trouble between the captain Of the 'sse
and the spite drivers the latter threatening TO cut the vessel aud
then irving pass the vessel aud the dock The boom
that he could not and he did not Know
happened aerwad He denied having had any connee
witt the pe drivers having used violence his
confined bis house for days and did not
Market m twelve days after except the
day injury VII he straight from the vessel 10 the
| police
The plaintiffs sory confirmed by other witnesses bis
making somewhat light OF his injuries than him
self and his friends.
The Court adjourned before the defense commenced
c. Schaeher for plaintiff K H. Hunicy for defendants
! COURT OF COMMON PLEAS-TRIAL TERs-PART l.
Before Judge CARDozo