The New York herald., 1874-09-10
BROOKLYN COURTS.
SUPREME COURT.
Decisions.

BY Judge Pratt.
S. Zemer VS.. s. X. Frazier.-Motion to consou.
date actions granted. No costs.
lyman Cook VS.. II. Van Alst.-Report confirmed
ana Judgment OF PARTITION. Queens.
d. LoveJoy VS.. +. Halam.-Order appointing 0
receiver
Knickerbocker Life Insurance Company vs. c. A.
Motion for receiver granted. Ten dollars costs.
Henry Ehlers VS.. NJ. Vassar ct al.-Moton
granted and stay continued pending suit Ten
John Percy vs.. William L. whiting.-No COM
paint being submitted, 1t Is impossible Tor me to
determine what matters in said answer are irrele-
want or frivolous. Again. the plaintin Is not pre-
JUDGED by denial OF tins motion, as the defects
complained OF can be taken advantage OF at the
trial. The motion is therefore denied.
L: F. Holdridge VS.. C. B. stewart.-Motlon de-
+. A. schroeder vs. A. ID. Ruggles. Motion to set
aside judgment denied, with $40 costs.
less defendent serves new answer and pays $40
costs within ten days II conditions complied with,
N. H. Odel VS.. Isaac Haddock ct a.~Motion to
confirm report denied. and proceedings sent back
to releree with instruction to take such evidence
as the parties may oIler touching the claim or II.
L. Haddock, and report the same with all speed to
this Court Westchester.
iendant's paving S25 costs; otherwise oenied.
j. A. Sheffield j. NJ. Pendleton.-Motion
granted and Injunction continued. on palntnrs
stipulating to try cause on third Monday OF Sep
tember inst.
granted and receiver continued, with s1O costs.
Rockland
An Important Case to Commercial Men.
Before Judge Pratt.
Yesterday Judge Pratt rendered a decision In q
most important case involving the question
.'Can Judgment creditor after having accepted
compromise levy an execution for the balance OF
the judgment2" The case Is rs follows:-ln 1871
and 1872 Henry Ehers and Henry Tonncr were
partners, under the firm name OF Henry Ehlcrs a.
Co. The firm incurred an Indebtedness with NJ.
Vassar h Co., doing business at No. ll8
Warren street, New York, city. In tho early
part OF 1872 the firm OF II. Ehlers h CO.
dissolved, and AT the time Of their dissolution
were insolvent In May, 1872, judgment
for $s16 was rendered against H. Ehlers Co.
In favor OF Vassar Co., and thereafter, and in
March, 1874 Henry Tonner OF the firm OF Ii. Ehlers
4 Co., entered into settlement with Messrs. Vas.
sar Co., and obtained from them q receips In
full OF the judgment against II. Ehlers h Co., riy-
ing In payment therefor $3.50 In money and his in
dlvidual notes for $3.50. subsequently ELlers en-
Ohland, on Commerce street, In this city. the
Snerln now appears on the scene with an execu-
tion issued out OF the Marine Court OF New York,
and on the old Judgment debt OF Messrs. Vassar b
Co., ana levies upon MIR. Ehlers interest In the
Mr.. Shorter, the counsel for Ehlers, Immediately
moved, In the Marine Court, to have the judgment
SET ASIDE and vacated, but Justice JoGchlmsen de-
clued tnat = payment OF $500 could not IN law
satisfy Judgment OF $500. Mr.. Shorter then
against M. Vassar Il Co., to compel them 10 give .
satisfaction OF the Judgment, ana apphed 10 JUS
tice Pratt Tor an order staying the Marine Court
Judgment until the determination OF tue equity
cause.
on Monday Judge Pratt heard the argument IN
the case and yesterday rendered his decision II
favor OF Mr. Ehers. the plaintin. win $40 costs
motion.