The New York herald., 1876-03-14
DECISIONS.
SUPREME couRT-cHAxBKRs.


pooley VS.. Halpn Chowell Nichols. otlons
denied
smith VS. Aldrich.-what order is wanteds
Matter OF Frazer ct al Agate Mawbey; Sparks
VS. Sparks Baker Kugherz.et al matter Of FeIdi
ct al matter OF Graham; Baker VS. klugherz ct al
Same VS.. Same; Allen VS. Same; matter OF Jackson,
willett va Dunscomb.-M Motion denied ON ground Of
laches.
Matter of Dunham.-Guardian cannot be appointed
In this way.
Matter OF opening Lexington avenue from 1921 street
TO Harlem River. Order granted.
Matter of the petition OF the Dutch Church in Wash
nglon square, in the city ofNew York-Must be under
seal
BY Judge Brady.
Marks VS.. Marks-Report OF referee confirmed and
decree Of divorce granted to plaintiff.
Truax Dodge.-I am obliged to deny this motion
under the decisions in Grocers' Bank vs. ORorke,
How, 49, Weyand VS.. Tyser, 40 New York, 2Sl No
COSTS
Matter Of wlntcrs.-The denial contained in Mar.
shalps affidavit OF the payment of tho twenty five
OF the dcpositors as alleged In the petition,
prevents the granting OF the order sought Tor Motion
denied without costs
Uhlshemer VS. Heyman.- this case there must be
a reference ascertain the facts and report tho
Court. The whole matter can be determined
sitting and the rclator and defendant must be exam
ned before the referee together with such other wit
as parties may desire TO examine Let order
Of reference TO Howard J. Tooker be entered
Montgomery Va Montgomery-Ia am unwilling to grant
judgment of divorce upon the evidence in this case.
The proof OF the alleged criminal acts rests entirely upon
the testimony OF the PLY yscan who expressly pro-
hbitcd by the statute from disclosing information
which he had obtained from the defendant while at
tending upon him In professional oapac .ty 2R s
(Edwaris 422, 80 In my opinion the evidence Of
the physician should have been rejected "a Paige 400
Kendall VS.. Everyj Hit, 3o1) The case is sent back
for further proOfS
Wood VS.. KeaL-Moton to vacate attachment denied,
with costs.
Piummcr Tompkins Sin this case do not think
that the defendant has fully explained the c,rcum-
stances attending the giving o the mortgage to his
mother, aud the judgment obtained by his brother as
TO warrant In finding that he has overthrowD tho
made the part OF the paintlm The aidavits OF
the pantif disclosed good grounds Tor issuing order
OF arrest and they be fully met by the
cndant may have leave TO further papers, N
advised.
Blake vs. BendaL The afndavts in this case are
conflicting, but do not think that the case made by
the plaintiffs The time Of applying Tor the attach
fully met as TO require that order vacat-
ing the attachment should be entered Motion denied
with costs.
Remer Va Spolman.-Granted.
Dexter vs.. The Mayor, &c, and another. r.-The claim
being that the agreements set forth complaint
are fraudulent and void and that having TO be
tried and settled before the examination OF long
count become necessary. The motion for a refer
ence denied without costs.
seele VS. Seole.-Under rule % this motion should
have noticed within twenty days from the
OF the answer IL not served until twenty nine
days alter the OF the answer Under the de.
cison OF the Court OF Appeals In Fulton va Beeche 59
" ", 1881, am strongly inclined TO the opinion that
the remedy not by mOiiOn 10 make the answer more
definite and certain, but by moving for bill of parti
culars Motion denied, without costs
Bddleman vs. Kittrldge.While tho authorities cited
by the defendant establish the power Of the Court 10