The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1875-08-06
A LESSEE'S TROUBLES.


Al phcation was made TO Judge westbrook
holding Supreme Court, Chambers, yesterday, by
Mr.. william f. Mcnamara, counsel for Mrs. Sarah
Brown, Tor An injunction restraining Daniel X.
Lyddy and Joseph Cromian from proceeding
further In q suit commenced by them before JUS
tice A. I. Ackert in the Seventh District Court OF
this city, TO remove her from the house No. CT
Monroe street, for an alleged forcible entry and
detainer OF said house. As the proceeding Is
rather novel one and or considerable interest
to property owners, especially to those owning
lease aold property, we give synopsis OF the
facts shown by Mrs. Browns complaint and upon
which Judge Westbrook granted temporary In
junction and order to show cause why IL should
net be permanent
Mrs. Brown alleges that by assignment OF q
lease for q term OF twenty one years and enewed
for twenty-one years more, made by Henry X.
Remson and others In 1885, she is the lessee OF the
house No. 81 Monroe street, and that said lease
expired on the 1st of May last and that by the
covenants OF said lease it provided that In case
furtner renewal Is not granted arbltrators snoua
be appointed, one by the owner OF the house and
the other by the owner OF the lot, TO appfaise the
value OF the house ca saa lot, and that the owner
OF the lot shall pay sucn appraised value. An
other clause OF the lease provides That lessee,
Mrs. Brown, should not be compelled 10 surren-
OF the appraised value Of the house is paid TO her
by the owner OF the lot. Before the LIST OF May
last Daniel K. Lyddy purchased the lot In question
IRON the executors OF the Remsen estate, subject
TO the conditions OF the lease Arbltrators were
then appointed by Mrs. Brown and Lyady, VINO.
ialllng 70 agree as TO value, selected an umpire
according to the provisions Of the lease, who duly
made aware or So 500 as the value OF the nouse.
mat Lyddy should pay 10 Mrs. brown. Payment
o. thus amount was demanded and refused ON
tue 7tn OF June. 1875, Lyddy commenced proceed
ngs before Judge Ackert oil the Filty-seventh
street District Court, 10 dlspossess Mrs. Brown
from the premises, on the ground that she was
holding over after the expiration OF hsr lease.
Judge Ackert, as alleged. without having signed
any summons Tor her TO appear, and without nav
Ing obtained jurisdiction vi the subject matter,
iOtn OF June to remove Mrs Brown from the
premises, ana sue, with her furniture, was
moved that day. IL Is further set forth that In
obtaining SAID warrant Lyddy fraadulenty CON-
ceaed from the Judge the fact That he had not
paid MIS- Brown the vaue OF said house, and that
she was entitled to possession until sue was paid
according to her lease; that paper was served
upon Mrs. Brown purporting to pe a summons
requiring her tO appear before said Judge at
nine O'Clock ON the said 10th OF June, but ner
counsel being detained by an accident to the
horse car on which ne Mas riding he did not ar
rive uutll nine minutes past nine O'Clock said
morning; that at nine O'CLOCK Lyddy obtained ms
warrant to dispossess. and when Mrs. Browns
counsel arrived lie asked Lyddy, VINO had not yet
elt the Court, TO try the case on the merits, but
he REUSED and left the building. The counsel then
asked the Court TO open the defauls and grant "a
stay which was refused. few days alterward
AIRS. Brown, finding the premises unoccupled,
quietly and peaceably re-entered and resumed
possession thereof Mr.Croman, the other oefend
ant, claiming TO be a tenant at Will or Mr.. Lydoy,
demanded possession from Mrs. Brown. which she
refused until she was paid the value vi ner house.
Then Cromlan commenced proceedings also before
Judge Ackert against MRS. Brown ior iorciple
entry and detainer Of the house. On the return
day VI tire summons In that action Mrs. Browns
counsel presented Aifidavits before the trial com.
menced setting tortn tnat he, Judge AckerL, wasa
necessary and material witness lor her turtler
ting forth the facts she intended to prove by nim
Upon these papers counsel moved " discontinue
tue proceeding before that Court, which motion
Judge Ackert denied. Inc trial then proceeded
before Judge AeEert ana Jury. and IN the course
Of it .ne Judge held that his warrant, issued as
aforesaid, entitled Lyddy ~ possession, aud re.
fused 10 permit MRS Brown 10 give her lease IN
evidences or TO give any evidence 10 snow how she
was IN possession, ana to show that the summons
In the other proceeding had not been signed by
Judge Aokert. Tne Jury on that trial disagreed
and were discharged. Judge AeRert tneu
summoned new jury, and adjourned the
case to the 9Th OF August. Mrs. Brown
iurther alleges that the papers In the
former dispossessing proceedings we're taken
TO the supreme Court General Term, by writ OF
certlorarl, and are there pending; that Lyddy Is
irresponsible. and that II ne succeeds in obtaining
possession ci the house sue Will be without
remedJ; that Cromian - not tenant OF Lyddy,
and that they are both eonspirinR toge ther ~ de-
Iraud ner Of tue valne 81 the mouse. In Aerp prayer
Ter eeikef hho aska tsa ahkrAuoa naart 10 kfnt an