The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1876-04-08
DECISIONS.


department the will be appealed test case.
DECISIONS.
SUPREME couRT-cHAMBERs
BY Judge Barrett
Keys AcReynolsi and another-Report confirm
ed and judgment for deficiency granted.
Tiemann VS.. BotL-The second cause OF action is
aomit.ed as TO the arst the allegation Of partnership
general averment OF tho complaint admits what he
previously ignored. The JOINT cause OF action being
admitted, 1t Is mmateral whether the relation Of u
technical partnership existed The agreement pleaded
was void as mudum pactum Motion granted
Redmond, &C., vs.. The Charter Oak Lie Insurance
Company.-The motion to remove must be granted,
and as the complaint not verified as IN affidavit the
ing order In the United States Court
Browning vs. Abrams-l am satisfied, o matter Of
fact that the plaintiff did not the defendant to
be brought here with view TO his arrest, civeter.
Their sole interest was criminal punishment This
being Adrsnce Lagravs, 90 NJ Y no. ia authority
ing IA Abb n S. 3s3 inote), that persons bringing
party within the jurisdiction IN bad faith
for the purpose Of civil arrest should not
acts but that this rule does not apply to persons not
concerned in the device. II may we'll be assumed
rule did not apply TO the bringing tho party
on whore there was neither trick nor device nor bad
faith their part The test was evidently the intent
Notion denied, with $40 costs.
Foley vs.. Rathborne. According to the plaintiffs
theory bank account Of tho amount OF $780, 900
could be tied up we'll Of 80 000 and that in
Judgment against q partner with small interest.
This is entirely without foundation and tho injunc-
ton must be modified require the bank to
tain but So 500 with leave TO wetmore the arm 70
move the injunction, II advised, ~ toto,
upon the close Of the examination in case the judg
ment against Rathborne be set aside or opened.
Mclean VS.. House The pieadings must be sub
mittcd.
In the matter OF the Protestant Episcopal Public
School assessment under the Acts OF 1865
and 1861 do think that resolution authorizing
the construction Of the sewer in question was neces
sary Nelson vs. The Mayor, &c.l The remedy OF the
relato If there was no jurisdiction seems 70 me to DO
In the matter or Hoo Co-The proof in this case
being that the assessment will be vacated See
my memorandum In the cases OF Chllson w. Budcl-
In tho matter Of Shirmer This case seems to fall
within the doctrine Land down in re Little, 90 n. Y, p
34 The motion 70 vacate the assessment s therefore
granted.
In the matter OF Plymouth Baptist Church.-An or
der vacating the IN this case will be granted
tor tho reasons stated In my memorandum hied this
In the matter OF the Trustees OF the Fifth Avenue
Presbyterian Church The motion 70 vacatc this as
is denied for the reason stated In my mono
randum in the matter Of the Protestant Episcopal
school, this day filed.
ment-The proofs appear TO show that the resolution
or ordinance was not published In the Corporation
newspapers as required by law, and that the
ment was therefore improperly imposed The motion
to vacate the assessment must be granted.
In the matter Of WllIeL-The proof that the former
1874 page &c., Notion 70 vacac assessment IL Denied
win leave to put IN further proofs II 30 ADVISED .
In the matter OF Chilson This differs from the
case OF Budeman brought 10 vacate tho same
ment nasmuch the referee in this reports that
appears from the evidence before MN mat the prior
assessment had been paid The assessment Will tnere
In the matter Of Budeman.--It is sought to bring
this within the exceptions contained IN the
1872 1874 the ground that the street has
been paved and assessment imposed upon the prop
erty for that purpose which has paid
In my OPINION, II tho imposition OF The previous
assessment ID to be deemed 10 have been properly
shown, there IL not sufficient evidence that the same
contempates, as view II, positive or at least some
proof Of payment arising from lapse Of time must
In the matter or the Mechanics and Traders Bank
The assessment vacated.
In the matter OF Broesslor, &c-I regard the proof
that Sixth aud Ludlow streets are the insult
Gent and OF opinion that the 10 not clearly
within the exceptions contained in the acts Of 1872 and
1874 as to justify order vacating the
| The motion must. therefore, DO denied. See my
memorandum wiIletis case.
| In the matter OF Judsen.-If the assessors the
Croton Board had no jurisdiction, or acted
roneous principles, the remedy 10 BY certiorsri Tho
case o. oors n @ o. me aes1s'ons
vs. Mayer SC &C., j. K, 429). do not think that
any resolution OF the Common Council was necessary
laws 1885, =. 7l6. do not that the proof sup
ports the allegation In the petition that the work was
not advertised.
Of the opinion that the which ~ first proposed
allow would not he an adequate compensation for tho
services rendered by them shall allow $1,000 10
each counsel and the costs and disbursements Of the
proceedings.
Richards VS. Richards.--In this case no brief has
boon submitted on the part OF the referee. wish
counsel the referee TO inform where this
is distingushablc from Campbcvs. Campbell 4S How
25d Either party may submit additional briefs within
Cutting vs. stevens --Urdsr granted fixing amount
Of security for stay IA 81 Judo. pr.av.
Phillips W. Bailey. Order granted
SUPREME COURT -CrRcurT--PARr /.
BY Judge Van Worst
Baer Va Lcppcri Of aL-cass and amendments SET
SUPREME coURr-sPEcrAL TERM.
BY Judge Van Worst.
Muller vs.. Jacoby OF aL--Findings settled.
Eelis Va Otard Judgment FOR plaintiff
Gaylor 81 o. va George o. aL-Finaings and decree
Bennett va Barney. Judgment for defendant on
demurrer, with liberty to plaintiff 70 amend terms
SUPERIOR coURT-sPEcIAL TERM.
BY Judge speir
Titus Ct al Brown ct aI-Ths Ii n motion to
change record relating TO q limo bounding estate
claimed 10 have been changed IL is TOO grave mat
ter 10 be determined upon conflicting aaidavIts and
to ascertain tho facts. Memorandum.
Pendcrgast W.. Jackson. The motion made 10 set OF
the judgment entered December "a 1885, and the
OF motion against the judgment entered February ~
/ 1870, Is denied, with costs
to Mr. +. Randolph Robinson.
wooIcy vs.. AppcIl Order denying motion, with
$40 costs.
Mobr vs. Mayer ct al--Refcrcnce ordered.
Pcndcrgast vs. Phillips Ct al-Ordcr denying motion,
with $40 costs.
Doyle ct al vs.. Lord, Jr, ct al-ordor for commits
sion.
by Judge Sanford.
Purcell va The New York Lite Insurance ond Trust
Company ct all think each Of tho defendants should
be permitted 10 tax separate bill Of costs.
MARINE coURr--cHAMBERs
BY Judge McAdsm.
frosty vs. Stone-Motion denied
Carpenter VS. er.--Motion granted
Drossy vs. WelIs.--Opnion.
Ramberr vs won Budcii Woln.-Thc order Of
March IA 1876 IL right and must stand.
schurmann VS. Hughes. Motion granted as per IN
dorsement.
Streethers vs.. Tallman Order settled.
TsdIev Va Murray; Foster Phillips; Gordon w.
Taddcn; Totans VS. Girard; Dunn Va Wells; Weeks