The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1875-05-28

shown by the examination 10 entitle the plaintiff
10 nave a receiver appointed 10 ABB 90;
Robertson, 30Ll
CusnIer VS.. konlnon.-I do not think that the
Court ought to appoint the pIantin as receiver
In TINS case e watts Pracuce and cases clted.)
/ am wiling To accept any proper, responsible
person VINO may De nominated by the plalntitI's
Fowler VS.. Benson-A critical examination OF
the ai aVlts su omitted Oh the motion has served
only TO strengthen the Impression whicn formed
upon the argument that Inc order OF arrest was
not properly granted. IL is incredible tnat a man
OF the attalnments and education which the de-
iendant is shown TO possess could upon so many
different occasions have been made the victim OF
fraud in the purchase and exchange OF real es-
tate, and on each occasion the victim OF the same
KIND oil frald-to w.t. u fraudulent personation or
the real owner and the forgery 81 deed IN the
10 Abb, 475, Is directly IN point against the
defendant on this motion. The strong
prepopderance Of evidence Is against the
VS.. Hecksher, 80 Barb 45l; Ely vs.. Mumord, Al;
Baro., 62e; Sars vs.. Peck. Abb, n. s., 55.l
The objections that tue warrant does not state
return day DO not regard as Well founded IL Is
not pretended tnat the warrant was not served
upon the right person, nor that any injury has re
suited from the omission to arrest The date OF the
return DAY. Motion denied. vita costs.
Auaenrled VS.. Wllson.-The fair construction or
tne srinna1Ion in this case seems TO me TO be that
the case was TO ABIDE the decision or the Dorey
suit as TO Its result aud not as 70 the amount OF
costs to be allowed as entered upon the Judgment.
In other words, upon the determination OF the
Dorey suit the rights 0: the parties as to the sub
settled In acco dance with tnat decision. The
words In the stipulation, !" either party to lie at
liberty ent er Judgment with costs, as the result
OF the Dorey SUIT will determine for the
plalntin or defendant the same as II a
trial had been mad thereon" must be taken
as a statement that that action would de-
termine the question at issue between
the parties to this suit, not that II would deter
mine the amount oil the costs. The rights reserved
10 enter judgment, with costs on the determina-
tion OF the "Dorey suit" refers only to sqcn costs
were appropriate 10 tins SUIT &C the stage
which lr had reached when the stipulation was
made with the necessary dlsbursem ents. The
costs must be readJusted in accordance with these
views
Foster VS.. Smyth.-The order amending the
summons VIII be granted but do not how
order can be made appointing guardian ad Item
Tor tue infant Defendant until some notice OF mo-
ton Tor tat purpose has been served on her.
While 1t may be difficult to ind the IN ant
A. cannot oe impossible, inasmuch as there
are two afidaylts attached 10 the moving papers
from parties wao nave known ner many years and
can in all PROBABILITY give some information as TO
her Whereabouts. The iniaut IS over fourteen
years OF age, and under the provisions OF the
Code. section ll6 has the right TO apply flr the
appointment OF her own guardian IN the nrst ln-
stance, unless residing out OF the state or absent
thereirom. In that event the plaintiff may apply
on direct APPLICATION Tor that purpose. The am
davis do not snow that the infant ls apseht from
the state or q non-resloent nor that she mas no
general guardian.
SUPREME COURT-CIRCUIT-PARr
BY Judge Van Worst.
Hauneld OF OIL. vs.. Macy and anotner.-Aemo-
rRndum.
SUPERIOR coURT-sPEcIAL TERM.
BY Judge Van Worst
Sands VS.. Naylor, &c.-Order OF referee 70 COM
Welsh. receiver. &C., w. Robinson ct aL-Appli-
cation granted.
Braisied VS. Lee.-Motion granted
BY Judge curtis.
Sutherland VS.. Tue New YORK Central and Hud-
son River Railroad COMPANY; The existing stay
judgment on the verdict