The New York herald., 1874-11-18

he ought to, and suit was the result, the former
employing Messrs. Breen a Gearon as counsel, and
the latter Magnus Gross. temporary injunction
was obtained enoining job from interfering
against Joe that on last Saturday night he broke
or the locks and removed some OF the goods The
case came up yesterday on an order TO STOW
cause why the injunction should not be continued.
The defence i that Enkc was not partner bur
mer Sny na on sne sses M a
Enke In this branch OF business was accepted in
lieu OF capital. Judge Donohue took the papers.
street Commissioners Fees.
There was a lengthy argument In this court
yesterday IN the case OF the suit brought against
the city by Thomas w. Pltman. In which he sues
for ices as commissioner in q street opening. The
defence is that a portion OF the fees claimed Ia
payable 20 George H. Purser against whom the
city has counter claim for oyerpayments IN other
street opening cases. On the other slde, IL was
conteDded that the taxation OF these claims by
the referee was ANAL ana motion was made % TO
strike out the city's answer as frivolous. Judge
Donohue ut once granted the MOTION
Decisions
By Judge Donohue.
Donohue vs. The Mayor, nc. Blum, jr. VS.. Wild
John Russell Cutlery Co. vs. Keith Nickel Plating
Co.; Bailey vs. stevens: Valentine Butler Sale and
Lock Co. v5. Campbell; COres vs. Mcdowell; Bel
lows VS.. Donaph Wood vs.. Gbson.-Granted.
currie vs.. Holmes. cs.-MOtion denied.
Rayoad VI Ms% ork r ana Sor
Mcawan; Martin vs.. stewart: Ressmann vs.. Brac-
bury; Hening vs.: Wood; Hall ". Wagner; Banks
vs.. Cockburn ct al-Motions granted.
Brown VS.. Thesis et aI.-Motion denied without
costs.
pittman VS.. The Mayor, &C.; shuDer VS.. Buck.
Haliner Va Hcydecker. Motion denied.
Gillespie vs.: Brooks ct al; National Butchers
and Drovers' Bank VS.. Caikn.-Granted.
Woods Machine Company vs.. Northwestern
National Insurance Company.-Motion granted; I;
Bailey VS. Ferris; I.oder vs. New York. Utica and
ogdensburg Railroad Company; Banks VS.. Cock
burn ct aL-Granted.
steigerthal vs.. stetgerthal.-Decree OF divorce
granted to plaintiff
Winans VS.. Leland ct al.-0rder granted.
Importers and Traders National Bank VS.. Ad-
ler.-Granted.
Lounier vs.. Lounier.-Motion granted.
EbbonghOusen VS.. Templeton.- denied,
Knight vs.. Ma0Dey.-Granted.
Abraham VS.. Grencel No. l-Alowance granted
Comm vs. Coke.--MotOn denied.
In the matter OF Agnes NJ Moses; Hotchktss VS..
DowdaIl; Neal VS.. The Mutual Life Insurance Com
| pany. --GranCed.
In the matter OF the Chesapeake and Ohio Rail.
road Company.-Oplnion.
Loder vs.. New York, Utica and Ogdensburg
| Railroad C0mpany.-Mot0n denied.
Houghton vs. HOughton.-Memoraudum
Higgins vs. Flclds.- Granted.
| In the matter of the Coral She'll Marble Com
RIende vs.. McKinly.-Morlon granted.
Heck vs.. Davidson; Sands vs.. Ruston; Green
wich Savings Bank VS.. LetfI.-Granted.
Metropolitan Savings Bank vs.. Irwin, ct al
(three actions) .--Reerence ordered.
Ochs VS.. Cayanagh Palen ys. Bushnell; Gregory
vs.. Dipckesplel; Marthlng VS.. Barry; CLARK vs..
RouSsel.-Grant
Keeper vs.. Runk.-Motion denied without costs.
Pope ys. Buckley.-Mo.ion granted.
Whitney vs. Townsend. denied,
Beary ys. Reich Macmurd0 vs. Markham; Open.
helmer VS.. Won Biela.-Graned.
III the matter OF Fahnestock.-Me- -.orandum.
Abraham vs.. Grenell mo. 2).-Alowance
granted.
Hewlett vs. BeL-Memorandum.
By Judge Barrett.
In the matter OF the opening OF Tenth avenue,
&c.-Tne motion must be denied. Tnere Is no
doubt that injustice has been done to the Conl-
missioners Il the referee Was bound by the evil
dence and was right In his view Of the law OF
1852, but think that the taxation by Mr. Justice
Lawrence upon his report was final and conclu-
sive; have grave doubts as to whether the Com
mlssoners were entitled to more than thirty cents
per linea loot, as provided In the act OF 1862 but
ihe taxation Is final In their favor as well as
against them.
BY Judge Lawrence
In the matter OF Patrick Conway.-Assessment
vacated.
shackman vs.. Oppenheimer. to dis
charge the defendant from custody granted.
Opinion
Burke va. Burke.-MemOrandum for counsel.
Winchell VS.. Winchell-Motlon that precept
Issue Is granted. Motion to strike parts re-
ply STANDS over until the answer Is submitted.