The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1872-08-27
SUPREME CouRT-spscIAL TERM.


Against an Ex-Corporation Attorney,
OF New York, for Legal Services.
Before Judge Barnard.
Daniel J. Walden vs.. Theodore E., Abby E. and
David TOmlinsOn and Thomas Winser.-The plain
tin is New York lawyer, Abby E. TOmlins0n is his
sister, Theodore his brother-n-aw and David
their son. Walden claims that when Theodore was
appointed Corporation Attorney Of New York in
1S47 there was an agreement between them that If
he paintifr) attended to the attorney business of
the Office he should receive, in addition to the
salary paid by the Corporation, one-third Of the
taxable costs in all suits in Courts OF Record which
We're prosecuted or defended by Theodore as attOr-
ney, by virtue OF his ONCE, or by other employment
OF the city, and also In all actions in which Theodore
should be substituted in place of the attorney for
the Aims House Department. Subsequently res
oluton was adopted by the Common Council
transferring certain actions pending in Courts Of
Record in which the city was interested, and which
had been begun by the Attorney for the Aims
House Department to the Corporation At
torneys ofice, Theodore being substituted as
Attorneys work In these suits was done by
himself, and also the greater part Of the counsel
business and the taxable costs amounted to $21 129
In August, 1859, recovered q Judgment OF $32, 256
against the city of New York in an action brought
for that amount and counsel fees. The Court OF
Appeals affirmed the Judgment and last June the
city paid the amount 1t Is now claimed by plain
tin that he should have been paid $14 900 20, the
amount Of his share of the fund under the agree
ment entered into between him and Mr.. TOmlinsOn
in 1915 but Mr.. TOmlins0n, who is insolvent, pre-
tended to have assigned the Judgment to the other
defendants, and in order to prevent the money
being reached by his creditors and the payment OF
Mr.. Walden's share, the money was taken, and is
now in the custody and possession of Mr.. Tominson
and the other defendants, but subject to the control
and disposition of Theodore Il. TOmlinsOn.
Mr.. Walden desired that the amount due him be
ascertalned that the defendants be enjOned from
dispOsing of the money and that receiver be ap-
pointed until this action should be determined
Judge Pratt granted preliminary injunction
and appointed the Brooklyn Trust Company re-
cever OF $4,000 Of the amount. An appeal was
tnereupOn taken to the General Term. The case
was before the Court yesterday on motion for
stay OF proceedings as far as the receiver taking
charge OF the $4,000 is concerned. Decision re-
served.
The Lee Avenue Railroad Trouble.
Frederick Greis and others, property-owne on
Lee avenue, have brought suit to restrain the Viii.
liamsburg anu Fatbush Railroad Company from
laying tracks in that thoroughfare. The plaintiffs
claim that the company has not compiled
majority OF the pIOperty.0wners before laying the
tracks.
The company, on the other hand, say that they
are laying the tracks under the general Railroad
act, and not under the act OF 1866. All that Is
essary under the general act was to obtain the
claimed that the plaintiffs had standing in Court,
nasmuch as their deeds do not give them any rights
In the street, the property being bounded by the
street line.
The argument for the injunction was heard yes
terday. Decision reserved.
Decision.
j. H. Gilmore vs.. The East New York and Jamaica
Railroad Company.-MOtiOn to continue Injunction
denied, with $40 costs.