New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1867-12-12
TIE CIVIL COURTS.

fecpused, Icy !It uru property NautA IT fFi1J
between his son, Edmund H. Dayy and tho ch.llron OF
his other son Ni.u"l O. Dayy giving Tie greater P1r
contest thcWul r ground of the mental Incompetence
" the tcstatOr. -,
by Philip ). Heartt, Hams j Hanson, William A. Good
man and Mayer H. Levy lnrm 80 Goodman g. Levy,
saao Ley me, Harris hoyt ard frHncis Bcr"Ner nra OF
Solomon Nigel, Edgar rreadwcii, ana Theodore G. too.e
All Of the abqyc petitioners except the hsnnned' foOte
are OF this city FooIe Is 81 GfeouDaiSA WESTMINSTER
County.
Considerable excitement has been created in
NeWburg by confessed will case now before Tie Sur
dofe Calhoun q tic Uuied states navy recently died
g9Ef ~ W. VIZ o lone, "f Ne%bnrgh S NH whom VI
he had lived some time previous 10 ms death lie Iad
previously made another WILL leaving all his property 70
i Mr. and Mrs Weed with whom DO once lived, aud row
the father aud of the csator contest both Wis on
tho ground that he was OF unsound mind ~ the time OF
making them and IN each Cse was unduy influenced Dy
the legatcc. The ease Is san On.
In the Brooklyn City Court yesterday, before
Judge Thompson. Lawrence WilerOter mncted IN
t25 damages The action was lnd ut 5000 by Paul lar
bcrlnO. Who rents me house No. ~ lrNlhg-sI, ioF
tin ~ = tenant, and WISHED 10 rent Tue houso
over his bend Hence the difficulty aud the present suit
Warren l.. Wells bought property OF George l. hehuh'
valued ut 600 About e. 800 only paid aud the res
lduc Is sued for In defense WAS SHOWN thal ~ te
time Of purchase, Wells was minor t0ulsei TOT lhe
plantn argued that when The property wac obtained ut
PENDANT made representation TINT he was over 2. years 81
age and therefore, he was liable Tor any Cebts Whuo ho
80 represented himself. Case sin on
Anna Jones sues, In tho Court OF Common
pleas FOR dyorcc from her husband Robert Jones' we
charge being cruel treatment and incompetent support
one OF the alleged his refusal TO supply her
with suitable clothing Tao affidavit aLlrma that the
couple we're married on the 2lth OF July, le6: hauy
had the honeymoon passed when Robert pulled her hair
Knocked her down, aud otherwise maltreaied hef. MS
Jones appealrd the crminn courts, whcreat Mr. Jones
became repeutaut aud. ON condition that che would
abandon the suit gave Lof hill OF gale OF tho lease OF MS
store at No u Amtyst She ailrms that ne mtcrward
deposited the money received IN tho Eighth National
Bank Of this city In the name OF Dennis sheridan ROD
ert saws that the transfer Of the b or sale was 0 10
induce her to return he having already sold the stock 10
Sheridan She pays for aimony, his property belhS es
timAtod to DO worth FROM $1,000 10 s!oo INC case Is
still on. $3.50,
Patrick Cuff. n liquor-dealer in Eighth-avc,
who offered 10 become bondsman for President Roberts
the Widow Dorand who Is represented q be aged, lonely
and somewhat hypochondrical, aud the roSsessor OF
several yncan lots Ia Eigthave to compel her 10 make
specific performance Of contract. Gun wanted tie lots
aud made contract TO purchase them at part cash ana
tho residue "a remain on mortgage. The widow suDse
guently refused give possesson tho ground that
the contract not what she believed IL 70 be when eho
made H. Cuff accordingly invoked tho law TO compel the
ransfor The trial occupied over week, and tue Court
decides that tho contract was VOID, the eNdehce
cum were alone the former having adviser. and beng
under the impression that she Was 10 receive the ul
missed without any costs plaintiff had been put TO
unnecessary expense aud trouble by the daorness OK
defendant in not notifying him OF her refusal TO surrender
the property even Rftr che had advice OF counsel
Judge BlatchfOrd made an important decision
in the linked States DistrctCourt yesterday IN the case
uf David q. Tai agt. The Brig Eledona The bill was
filed In this case 10 the value of mast which Ii
bennt claimed no had furnished the Eedona and that,
according to the maritime law, and the 2th rule OF the
Supreme Court amended IN 1853 he had lien ON the
vessel for Tho claimant excepted TO the libel on the
ground that It did not SGT up necessity Tor the ofeu OF
tho vessel being pledged and also the fnc,s, denied
that the mast furnished TO the vessel but claimed
that no bought the mast in question, not nom the hbel
ant from another person, whom lie paid and further
claimed that captain OF the vessel had money ana d
not need to pledge the vessels credit The Court held
that In all o this character 1t was necessary TO
show an apparent necessity fer the vessels credit 10
make her liable The fact whether 10 appeared IN the
Tint atYft
sound discretion OF the Court 10 determine aud IN tns
case IN the exercise Of It's discretion the Court Wou
hold That there was no such necessity and that neither
the vessel nor tho owner liable, and would lhero
fore dismiss tho libel with costs.