The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1875-06-15
DECISIONS.
SUPREME cnAMBERs.
BY JudRe Lawrence.


HARRISON vs. Van voikenburgn.-Tne plaintiff
seems 70 me 70 have made out case, which en-
his petition GA How, 257; Q Waits Practice 543
and cares citedl. | 40 not regard the alleged
settlement OF the accounts between the parties
as 80 lar conclusive as under the other crcum-
stances directed ny the papers TO precuue the de-
lendant from maintaining TINS sur. Ice order
VIII be settled Deiole me on TWO days. notice, and
sucn provision must be mace In the order as will
render the Inspection as convenient for the de-
iendant possible. len dollars costa o. motion TO
pantn
Harden vs. Corbett.-The motion to vacate the
order for the examination Of the plaintiff IS
aenisd, with cosls OF motlon. The plainIln is IN
contempt, ana apparently designedly so. ! SHAH
stay all proceedings on the part Oh the painlln
until she has relieved herself Of the coniempt.
Order to be settled on one days notice before me
at Circuit part Z.
Brant Va. De Forest ct aL-The oroer made by
mo May 70, 1876, provided Tor the payments TO be
Phal and see no reason Tor any other or further
order IN that respect me confusion IN the case
has arisen from tne fact that anidavirs ana papers
have been handed into the Court separately ana
without any reference having been made TO papers
previously acted upon and lied with the Clerk at
bean vs. Benedict.-The Justice before whom
the cause was tried heard motion for new tral
on ms minutes and denied IL. cannot therefore,
interfere on the ground that tine verdict Was
against the weight oil evidence. II tarnham's
evidence would have been OF any value, whoa
very much doubt after reading the inconslstenG
atnlavlEs which ne has made on this motion,
am OF opinion on the whole case that enough Ii
trial on the ground OF surprise. Nor can say
that The Jury would not have been warranted IN
finding the same verdict as they did even camp
bell mad sworn on the trial as the plaintin claims
he would have done II examined. Motion Denied
In the matter OF the Klngsoridge road.-Ihe
General Term allowed TO MIR. Lynch $40 COSTS OF
motion and mis- disbursements. ON denying the
potion to DISMISS the appear under tns order only
those disbursements which were necessarily IN
CURED lor tue purpose oil resisting the motion TO
dismiss the appeal can be properly taxed. BY tho
afndavlt OF Mr. Deerlng 1T appear, that he
plIu[eu DOlntS ESPECIALLY den the points OF
tAe CORPORATION counsel on the moton TO dismiss,
whlca points cost $3.50. This seems 10 me TO be
properly taxed as disbursement rendered nec-
esSary oy tue motion to dsnlss. The other
ltems-yz., $40 Is Tor printing The appeal papers
ana SIS Sd Tor printing points on Jne merits on
resisting tue motion 10 confirm the reports OF the
COMMISSIONERS. cannot De allowed. Those items
relate 10 the main motion, and we're not and Gould
not have been rendered necessary by the muton
10 dismiss Inc appeal. IL Is OBVIOUS taaG II the
appellant should succeed In his opposition 10 the
confirmation OF tue report OF the Commissioners
lie Will ue entitled 10 TAX the Items referred 10
as disbursements ana therefore ne cannot lax
Lnem now. Tue costs must be rea6Justeu.
HARRISON VS.. Van valkenbui ga.--fne motion to
compel the plaintiff TO serve reply to the an
swer OF the defendant IS denied, with costs.
Mclean vs. Lonle.-MotIon granted anu Francis
J.. SleLson appointed ecelver.
waters, receiver. &C, vs.. Crawford.-As I dis
miss the order 10 show cause in when the default
Was granted, aud as the venue OF TINS action was
land In this county ana the same was only trans
1erred TO tue second department by reason OF
un1erence ol opinion between the judges OF This
department., l think that IL IS WITHIN my
ny default until the appellant can DC heard before
the next General fern Ia the second department..
Sucn stay Is accordingly granted.
knlgnL VI. haoney.-Ii correctly understand
the order oi Inc General Term, there has been no
violation OF sucn oroef on the part Of The referee.
Tue motion Is, therefore, denied, with costs.
Mast vs.. Tracy.-Fne mouon 10 yacate order OF
arrest Is denied, with costs ofmouon.
Harden VS.. Bogart.-Tne motion Tor stay Of
proceedings Ia TINS action, pei petually is granted,
Tor the reason that it qute evident from the ca
davis winch nave been d cd by the ueen dant
mat plaIntln Is vii ullY AVOIDING the service or
the orders Or The Court an IS guilty OF "A contempt
IN 50 DONG. CostS q motion allowed the ae-
By Judge Brady.
In the matter OF Tanning receiver; McKetson
vs.. Ferris; Alrcy vs.. Alrey; New YORK central
aud Hudson RIVER Railroad Company vs.. spa
der.-Orders granted.
American Paddlewheel company vs.. Goess-
ling.-ln TINS case counsel are requested TO appear
on the letn INST, At ten o'clocS A. Al.
want of prosecution.
Gates Va. DOdge.-Motion denied cOndltioaally.
Mcdowell vs.. Proudnt-Decree granted. NO
iion for allowance granted $1,000
raur VS.. lllmar.-Granted. (Opinion.l
granted on payment OF $40 costs, but without
prejudice to tue right OF the palntln TO oiscon-
tiEue this action before time TO reply expires.
see voorhees,, code lSlO), page go. Order 10 be
Lyddy vs. Kenny.--ln this case rhe counsel arc
INST, at ten O'Clock A. NJ.
In The matter OF Mu,ray.-Morion TO CONFIRM re-
port denied.
Paur vs.. Manifestation 22l ofthe code author.
lxes an Greer 10 SHOW Cause way an injunction
should not issue alter answer ana the restraint OF
the defendant untL the decision to be made. This
IS all tn9t the paintins obtained anu their pro-
ceedings were resu.ari the mOtiOn 10 dissolve Is
therefore denied, Win $40 costs 10 aDloe the
Egieson vs.. Hufnsgle.-Tne proceedings OF the
plantin are, rhinE, regular. Mr. Daily was the
attorney FOR the administrator, but seems to have
Inoug NJ that Mr.. MaTtn had charge oil rue case In
which Judgment was obtained. Toe plaintiff al
leges tnat me estate Is no. suf1clent TO pay his
ia gment and that he has paid reie reefs lees IN
TINS and the other action. Inc plaintiffs proceed
Jugs having oeea regular, the judgment must
stsad, anu the defendant permitted 70 defepd
only on terms. The piantia should De indemni-
fed against any further expense. inc defendant
must therefore post $50 10 cover further lees Of
reieree ana pay 10 the plainun's counsel 49, trial
fee.
SUPERIOR coURT-GESEEAL TERN.
By chief Justice Mcneil and judges Freedman
and SeGgwlck.
smith VS.. Ryan.-Judgment reversed, reference
vacated, new tTlal granted, with costs To appel
liant 10 ABIDE event. Opinion by Chei Justice Ao-
nell, Judges Freedman and SedRWlcK dissenting.
SUPERIOR coURr-sPEcIAL TERM
by Judge Van Worst.
Harte vs. Nye.-Complaiat dismissed without
costs. opinion.
searle vs.. walsh; Donovan vs.. The Compagnis
Generate 1ransatantique. orders settled.
Pierre Va. stern eT aL-injuncuon dissolved.
EcErOn vs.. Collins CT sl.-lhe Injunction must
be modified so as ONLY TO res ram the defendants
from selling or dIspOsing OF their interest IN the
letters patent, ana - 80 modified IL IL continued
untii the luether orGer OF the Court
COMMON PLEAs-sPKcIAL TERM.
BY Judge Robinson.
Agate vs.. Instrumentation Tor new trial de-
nlcd.
SUPREME CoURr-sPEcrAL TERM.
BY Judge Donohue.
Scamone vs.. kucS.-JudgmenI Tor plaintiff on
demurrer.
COURT or GENERAL SESSIONS.