The New York herald., 1875-07-01
DECISIONS
SUPREME coURr-cHAxBEss

SUPREME coUBr-cHANBEEs.
By Judge Lawrence
lie Rey vs. Weob.-The report OF the reieree
seems 70 me TO be correct. but l Ulsh 10 near
counsel in regard 10 the allowances. wiz 0e IN
attendance at TIE Circuit Court room, Part 2 on
THURSDAY, July /, fOr such hearing
Manhattan on Company VS.. The Connections
Mutual Lie Insurance Company.-l deny THIS mo.
tton, the ufnority OF the decision OF the court
! OF Appeals in the case Of Cook State Mutual
Bank, so n. l., 96-ll4, and also because am OF
opinion tnat the United states statute means tnat
| the arty seeking TO remove a cause from state
Court shall have some reason 10 believe mat ne
cannor obtain a fair and impartial trial before toe
state Court. There ls not one fact disclosed Ia
the sfidavlt or petition which goes 20 show mat
there any local prejudice against the delendan,'
I. e.. wnicn prevents fair and impartial trial
Motion dened with costs.
Trask vs.. The Peeksklll Plough Works.-On con-
dItion that the defendants within Eve days from
the entry OF tue order In the decision Will give
bond WIN two sureues conditioned for the pay
the petitioner in case the order OF March 81. 1875.
IS aflrmed by me General Term the stay OF pro-
ceedlngs will be continued and the motlon 70
vacate ine same denied, without costs; otherw
the motion is granted, with $40 costs.
warner VS.. The Pennsylvania Railroad Com
pany-NeIther OF the parties 10 this case IS cltl-
zen OF State. IT, therefore, the application 10
remove had been made under the act oil 1889 lt
would nave been denied on the ground that
neither party was a citzcn OF the Stale III which
the Circuit Court was to oe ned. west VS.. An
made under the act OF March 3, 1875. The second
section Ol that act provides that where the con.
troversy Is between cIlzens of nerent States
either party NAV remove tine suit into The Circuit
Court for the proper district on complying with
the provisions OF the act. The motion here Is to
remove The cause into the Circuit Court for the
Southern DIS rlct OF New York. AS neither party
resides In that district do not think that IL can
be SAID 10 be the proper district within the IAN
guage OF the act The decisions under the act OF
1889 seem TO me 20 be In point In constituting the
act OF 1915. lnasmucl as the defendant, alter de-
liberation, submitted 20 che jurisdiction OF this
Court oy voluntarily appearing In this action,
there should pc no forced construction OF the act
OF 1873 given Tor the purpose OF ousfing this Court
OF jurisdiction. Motion denied, with costs.
BY Judge DAVIS.
Plummer VS.. Taylor-rhe judgment was irregu-
larry entered and must be set aside. Serving the
Iive but as oelendants attorney waited one day
alter IL was granted before serving shall not al
low costs OF the motion. Ornered accordingly.
Simon vs. Demp6ey.-Nothng Is shown I0r o re-
celver. No receiver will be appointed.
In the matter OF Hyer-order grained.
Schroener VS.. HintZe.-MotlOn granted on de
fendant's stipuating not 10 bring an action for
false Imprisonment. Costs TO abide the event.
steven VS.. Serra.-It appears that the summons
and complaint were duly filed. The omission to
name the state Is not fatal the decision referred
20 Was overruied on appeal. There does not seem
70 be any necessity for extending the time TO ap-
pear beyond the extension ALREADY gwen. The
motion snoud be denied, with $40 costs.
In The matter of ihe North American Fire In
surance Company.-rnls motion should be Denied
without prejudice 10 any Application taat
the receiver TO institute proceedings TO recover
the dlviuends alleged to nave been made out OF
capital. IL does not seem necessary TO open the
decree for that purpose nor TO enter upon a hear
ing before the referee. His nnolngs aDd report
WOud not conclude the stOCkuOIueTS 10 WHOM tne
dividends were palu, nor the trustees by whom
they were declared. Motion denied.
New York Dlspensary VS.. Greene.-The questions
In this case seem to me too important TO De dis
pose1 OF on motion TO 1uasn the reluIn They
should De raised by answer or demurrer and pre-
seRted IN form tnat will secure greater delloera-
ton than can be given at Chambers. Tne motion
TO quash is denied without costs and with leave
to demur or answer, WITHIN twenty Gays, as the
relator may be advised.
Meehan VS.. The Harlem Savings Bank.-The
ayerments OF the answer sought to be stricken
nutar ut RI Oun lT-
relevant to deny allegations OF the complaint
winch were unnecessarily lnserted.-The motion
should be denied with costs.
BoIes VS.. New Jersey Midland Railway Com
pany.-I think tnis motion should be granted so
lar as to allow the receiver TO answer In the
oil the defendant within ten days, on stipulating
that the issues joined be forthwith referred Tor
ties or, in default OF sucn agreement, to DE
named Dy the Court. The Juogment and levy To
had. That proceedings be stayed on ttie levy TIL
the trial and decision. THAT neither party have
costs OF THIS motion.
COMMON PLEAS SPECIAL TERM.
BY Judge Loew.
The German Uptown Savlngs Bank VS., GoelIer,
et AL think the defendant Is precluded by the
stipulation signed by her attorney and by her sub
seouent acquescence in the judgment or decree
from raising the objections now relied on. The
motion IS therefore denied, without costs.
lngersoll VS.. Ingersol.-fhe motion Ior alimony
should, / tnlnk be denied. But a counsel lee OF
sl25 should De allowed.
for a stay OF proceedings denied.
By Judge J. f. DAILY.
Studwel vs. kuaart-Tnere Is no motion before
me in this case in which the proposed order can
be made.
Morange VS.. Welisohn.-0rder settled.
schmidt VS.. standardization denied. See
opinion.
Hull VS.. observation-disclosures Lee adjudged
gully OF conIempt. Fine imposed. See opinion
McMenomy vs. The Mayor DC Donohue vs. Tue
Mayor, &C. Reid VS.. The Mayor, &C.; Thomas VS..
The Mayor. &c. Walsh VS.. The Mayor, &c.-New
Trials granted. See opinions.
MARINE CoURT-CHAMBERs
By Judge Joachimsen.
Shepperd VS.. Observation-Disclosures report
confirmed.
Barott VS.. Capitalization to dismiss granted.
Shine VS.. Appeton.-Motlon TO open default
granted.
Beecher w. Nlcoll.-Metion granted, with costs.
Barlow VS.. TaJler.-Mouon denled, with cests.
Schuchman VS.. Hatfield; Bauman VS.. Benke-
Motions denied.
Foster vs.. Moran.-Motlons granted.