New-York tribune., 1873-02-20
THE COURTS.
CONTESTED BROKERS ACCOUNTS
THE COUNTER CLAIMS OF BAINBRfDGE ,o.
HENRY CLEwS co.

n1
HENRY CLEws u co. Ut
The case of Henry CLOVIS and Others o..
Robert Bainbridge mp before Judge Faneho, -
Supreme Court Chambers, yesterday. Toe proceeds
was motion to aside the report Of the referee .s
the Judgment entered theroupOn, whereby Cews A. ~
who had sued for ilGOoo had been adjudged 10 n
$4,000 instead OF recovering the demand. Jadge "a
wards Piorepont, Of counsel for Ccws e. Co. reyiea.
the history OF tho case and said that they asked to s
aside the report Of the referee. because t was wholly n
regular incomplete and ineduiiablc and that the actin.
OF the referee contrary % Law. He clainea
that the referee, in permitting the deicndant
10 amend bis answer acted irregulariy
and asserted that more than seven years had eapsea
when the application for leave to e tho counter claim,
was made and that-no such counter claim ha1 been
filed upon the plaintiff who lad had oppor
tuuity TO reply and TO plead the statute Of limitation.
He read various anidayits, among them one made by
Henry Cews, who testified that the referee after tia
summing up OF the case was concluded had called upoa
him and advised settlement Of tie case, which he sad
could be effected for $500 This suggestion Mr. Cews
did not heed. motion % stay tho entry Of Judgment
had been made ana tho Court permitted judgment 10 ba
entered but had stayed its execution until tho hearing
OF the present motion
Other afdavits introduced TO imPesch the test-
mony Of Banbridge, who Is dead Tho counsel for
the defense objected to merging former motion from
which the plaintiffs had retreated in the present pro
timODy OF Bainbrdge when he was unable to repo tho
attacks upon his character Tho Court decided that the
aidayits aiming 10 imDcach Banbridge could not b
read the notion and that no discussion OF tho merits
OF lie case could DO permitted as the only question TO bs
heard was the regularity OF the Judgment and the mis-
conduct Of the referee.
judge Edwards urged that the misconduct Of John p
Crosby the referee was evident that he erred IN er-
mting the defense amend their answer by an aie-
ton containing matter, and counter clam, which
was never sworn served upon the pialnt and TO
which he had 10 opportunity 70 reply. Robert 5ewe,
OF counsel for the defense, submitted the alats OF
himself John Hewitt attorney Tor BalnDrd1e ssy.
ing that the plaintiffs counsel had, upon the hearing
before the referee stipulated 10 waive service VI lla
amended answer and the Teplg 10 the counter clalm
Counsel Tor Clews % SAID that they lad never sgned
any suel -spuation. Mr. Sewcll claimed that % the
spulation had made IN COurt, before the referee
IL was binding As TO the allegation that the amended
answer contained matter, the counsel for
Balnbrdge said that the second defense
in the original answer affirmed that By
acting as brokers Banbrdge In tine purchase and
sale OF stocks ana secuifs the defendant sustained
damage amount equal 10 that claimed 10 the com
paint; that the amendment TO the original answer
under which the Judgment for $4,000 WAS procured did
not state any new facts but only claimed damages Tor
larger amount and an affirmative judgment; That t3is
defense had not Withdrawn, and that tne amend
ment was such change as 70 set up new cause OK
action The alleged misconduct Of the referee IN adyls
ing settlement was TO be treated ouiy as lnendly
suggestiOn without any mputaOn Of the exercise OF
improper influence the part OF the counsel Tor th'
defense.
Judge Fanchcr thought that the plaintiffs remedy wa.
appeal but on the question OF regularly cOhcluded
to take the papers.