The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1873-07-02
MARINE COUnT-pART 3.
Action for Services In the Foreclosure OF
a ChatteI Mortgage.

Action for Services In the Foreclosure OF
n Chattel Mortgage.
Before Judge Curtis
McDonagh vs.. Darrity ct al-The defendant, in
conjunction with Others, held mortgage for
$32, 900 upon the furniture in the Revere House.
then kept by one Fowler Becoming suspicious
OF the financial condition of Fowler, Darrity and
his associates employed plaintiff to foreclose the
mortgage, agreeing to pay him. as plaintiff, some
seven per cent upon the amount OF the sales. De-
PENDANTS contended that he was to receive only six
per cent 1t appeared in evidence that one I. J.
Coe had PRIOR mortgage upon the inrnl-
foreclosed and sold the property. Plaintiff claimed
that he was prevented from oreclosing by the acts
OF Darrity and his associates, they coming to the
conclusion TO accept their share OF Fowlers estate
that enterprising publican having been declared
bankrupt. Defendants denied that plaintin had
rendered any services at all. Action on the
QltdntuUl 7neT1nt.
Judge Curtis charged the Jury that where a party
was prevented by the acts OF the defendant from
carrying out contract, lie was at liberty to regard
the same as rescinded and to bring his action for
agreement :. In sucn case the measure
OF damages would be the actual worth OF the SER
vices, not exceeding in amount the contract price;
that when it impossible for either party oper-
form the contract, plantin was entitled TO recover
the actual worth OF his services, provided he could
show that defendant had been benefited by them;
that, under the law OF this State, the title absO-
luteiy vested in the MORTGAGE upon the maturity
of the mortgage, and no subsequent proceedings
in bankruptcy could impair It,.
Jury found Tor plaintiff in the sum Of $703. For
plaintiff, ID. McAaam; Tor defendant, General John
COchrane.
Effects OF Chloride OF Limo.
Travers ct al VS.. McBean.-PlaintifYs stored with
defendant quantity of jute, which, from being
placed in the same room with lot of chloride OF
lime, became rotten and defective. 1t appeared in
evidence that owing to the intense heat the lime
began to ferment and bursting the casks in which
it was confined, produced the injury. Defendant
contended that he notified plaintiffs to take away
the jute he discovered the effects OF the
lime upon 1t, but plaintiffs neglected to do 80.
Plaintiffs cOntended that 1t was dangerous to life
and health to enter the room where the lime was
placed. The amount OF the storage was paid under
| protest when the property was finally taken away,
and this action was brought for the damage to the
| Jute.
| Judge Curtis charged the jury that warehouse
| man was bound to use only ordinary care, except
| in cases where he had on storage goods OF a dan
! gerOus character to other merchandise in which
case he was bound to use extraordinary care; That
it the duty OF plaintiffs, after they had been
| notified OF the effects Of the lime, to lake away
their property unless the jury satisfied that
it was absolutely dangerous to life and health for
| them or their servants to enter the room where
the lime was stored. The jury were to say whethe
| the manner in which the lime was stored estab-
| lishcd negligence Oh part OF defendant.
Jury disagreed.