The New York herald., 1867-04-02
THE COURTS.
COURT or APPEALS.

Appeal from Judament Against . City Rail-
read Company Granting Damages for lnju-
ries Sustained ~ = Passcnger-IAability OF
Common Carriers.
Before Chief Justice Davis and full bench.
Augustus Mevick It al, RespOwdess the Eighth Ave.
nSe Railroad Company, AIpe,ansa This action was
commenced in the Court Of Common Pleas In the city
and county Of New York, where judgment for $1,000
camages and costs was obtained, which judgment
affirmed at the General Term OF the Common Pleas.
The facts Of the that Ellen G. Meverck wife OF
Augustus Meverick, and plaintiff with him, the 18th
OF January, 1858, passenger OF the Of
the Eighth line and the stopped for her
to got of at Thirty second street. As she on the
rear PLATFORM in the act Of getting or hook and lad
TANGO OF twenty feet when stopped, 1t with
their apparatus, and spike on the end Of ladder
breast aud crushed her right hand.
The appellants claim that the accident not tho
@ % ho ba ny ARE
rics not guarantors against the commission
Of injuries TO their passengers by third parties;
in endeavors 70 avert dangers which their agents
threatening the passengers their from the acts
Of other persons they not bound unless put their
from the Of reasonable the part Of third
partIes The respondents claim that II was negligence
the part OF the conductor 70 stop his Immediately
In front OF impending danger and he bad right 70
suppose that that danger would in fortunate way
and limb concerned are held 70 the utmost and
diligence and they must show that tho accident was
unavoidable BY any human foresight In TINS case the
OF third party does not discharge the carriers - has
been shown that by ordinary caution they could have
the evidence OF Augustus Meverick the husband The
counsel for the respondent proceeding to argue that
point the Chief Judge remarked that he need not argue
that point as the Court had settled opinion that
point which would appear In decision 70 % made TINS
term.
- Gu hsrs1f cd.
Charles II Duncan ef al, Respondents o. Great Wes-
cm Inmrance Compony Appenamta a-This action
brought upon policy Of 5000 upon the ship Aradne,
for the term Of one year from April l. 1885, and the ves
sci became total loss within the term. There were
two mortgages upon the vessel at the time the policy
was taken out and n was taken out by Charles Dun
for account Of whom IL may coucern;" and II is
claimed by the appellants that Duncan bad no nsprabe
interest in the vessel and the respondent claims that
be had such interest as trustee OF tne mortgages Ar
gucd and submitted.
The case Of Louisa North rs TN People which In
wolves ne o. vy ~. sc r Mo
day next with view Of obtaining early and author
iiativs decision Of the question.
The case OF Isrds Eds and Another BENJAMIN Far.
lev an action for trcspass against the Sheriff of Niagara
county was argued and submitted.
,enI-Ths is an appeal BY the defendant from the
uSrment rendered in the Eighth district In favor OF the
complainant NJ Thorn purchased Of McCrossan, the
hundred dollars and In payment gave him note pur.
porting 70 have been executed by man named Clark,
for 400, which 10 mature some two years after
date II turned out that before the note matured Mr.
Clark died. and when presented TO his administrator for
paymeut by McCrossan he declined TO pay it alleging
that the note forgery II referred to referees
who reported favor Of the defeudants-that the note
was mot the note Of the maker Clark and Mr. McCros.
san was subjected 70 The payment OF the bill Of COSTS
An action afterwards brought against Thorn re-
cover the amount Of the note and costs Plaintiff pro-
duoed the record the trial Of the suit Of Mrossan
against the administrator Of Clark. and claimed that that
was conclusive evidence that the note q forgery
Evidence In proof Of the genuneness Of the note was
ruled out and the appeal is made on this point The
appellant claims that the record be estoppei
against Thorn and the respondent holds that Thorn
rarity the record In the of McCrossan against
Carks administrator and that therefore, u 10 con-
elusive against him. Argued and submitted.
TAs Irving Bank, Respordent, jams Wahereu and
Awcthe, Appelionf "A suit involving promssory nots
for s3o4 30. and tho question whether paying telsrs