The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1876-06-27
NEW YORK HERALD TUESDAY JUNE 81 ls7e-TR1PLE SHEET

Hoatn vs.. Heath: Southland 81 al vs. Frosca; fa<
Park Bank vs. Patt; The Bank Of the OHIO Valley, OF
Wheeling. ". Va, 7. Ecces; IN tho mafter OF
Kelly, &c and seavsr, va The Mayor, &c. -Mcmoran-
dun.
wessa Va Hanschdl- II want 20 see counsel
Weonkampvs Linnewerth Taxation affirmed
signed.
end another; Buckmasscr VS.. Meyer and another;
Jessop Va Downs, aud Ranncy vs.. Peyser-Motions
denied.
Roosevelt va Palmer; Meyer VS.. Green, Ao, and
Fowler W. Cooper Motions granted.
Ranncy vs. Peyser.-Dcnied.
Roilwagen w. Hermann, and Harris vs.. Hutchina-
Godfrey M,ser-Mo,ion granted. Memorandum.
The Home Insurance Co vs. Murtfors, kc-Denied.
without costs See Memorandum
Schroeder vs.. Schroeder want 10 counsel
schsnck VS. Green, &c-raxation affirmed
Pagan vs. Beggs. Opinion.
Higgins vs.. Barnard; Aston &c, VS. White; Pcrrinc
vs. The National Fibre CO. Cutting Stevens; In the
nhsm Potter vs. neear we q s How :" 70 Hov n
the Matter or McAnama ct al; Pciton vs.. Lynch; Hin
mes vs. Bearl; Ryan vs. Ryan; MoIn, vs. Dunlap; Bull
VS.. Payne; Tallman vs. Tallman The Union Trust Co.
va Stern and Oswald va ehL-Grantcd.
BY Judge Lawrence
Won AIKEN Va Won Aken.-I think that tho point
made by the defendants counsel that the vile could not
acquire different domicilc from her husband during
her coverturc preclude her substituting
THIS action, aud II the action Is properly brought her
right TO apply Tor alimony and reasonable counsel ice
cannot be denied. Her papers show actual inhab-
tant OF this State at the time OF the OF
the alleged offences and the OF her thing
hib,tine the complaint e u s. 1901 An allowance Of
&12 so per week does unreasonable upon the
facts disclosed BY the aildavits Let an order be en-
tered Tor the payment OF that amount pcndentc lie,
and also Tor the payment OF counsel leo OF $500 The
payment Of the ahmony should date from the 10Th day
Exser vs. Exuer-Thc nrst paragraph in the COM
plant do not regard irrelevant, does the CON-
plant seem TO TO be subject tho objections taken
70 the complaints IN Eddy vs.. Bocrst, Abbot Is.
and Shaw VS.. Jayne, How. +. H., 1la In these
cases the peader had sct forth at great length the ev
dence by which he intended 70 substanatc the tact Of
his illegal imprisonment by the defendants through
their irsgatlon. Hero there is charge OF conspir
acy on the part OF two OF the defendants 20 mprson
tho plaintiff and that In pursuance such conspiracy
the other two defendants were employed TO make the
arrest
The second paragraph docs NOT appear to set forth
moro than cause of action when fairly construed,
that cause Of action being Tor illegal false mpris
onmcnt The objection 10 the allegation that the
plant prevented from attending TO her children,
one Of whom was very ILL., seems TO be well formed.
Tho allegation Is irrelevant and should TO stricken out
Motion is granted 10 the extent above indicated no
costs
Brennan VS.. Norris Order AS settled
SUPREME COURT--cIRCUIT-PART /.
BY Judge Lawrence.
Tho People cx rot Banta vs.. Kent and Same
KneisseL proof OF the ordinance referred 10 in
the briefs OF counsel has yet been submitted. The
attention OF counsel is again called TO the memorandum
heretofore ed BY and reported in tho daily papers
OF June g.
SUPREME couRT--cIRCuIr--PARr 2.
BY Judge Lawrence.
Dooley VS.. Hapin.-See memorandum.
SUPREME coURT--spEcIAL TERM.
BY Judge Lawrence
Halstead Seaman.-Counsel have not submitted
either the testimony or the peadings
chattcrton Gould ct al.-The brief OF the plain
tins counsel has not yet been submitted.
Keep ct al vs.. Gould et all am of the opiuion
that the complaint defective in stating that
cc gwen by the plaintiffs TO the Defendants OF
their intention TO sell the gold which tho defendants
Ia. ntsnzn and aI.t.
qucn,iy refused 70 accept lSee Fanchcr VS.. Good
man. % Barb, 3l6; opinions Of Baeom Campbell,
J. Malloy Us. Lord 20 Barb, 465; opinion Of smith,
J.) The cases cited BY the plaintiffs counsel do not
conflict with the just referred In Pollen vs..
lie Roy $50 n Y, 555 notice was gwen that the PLAN
tin would sell, and Emost, j. In delivering tho opinion
OF tho Court, held that II was not necessary give
notice OF The time and place OF sale, that notice
or intention 10 sell was unnecessary 50 In Durtan
vs. McAndrew ~ N. Y. "a notice was given 10 the
vendce by the vendor that he would sell on the ven
dcc's account and hold HIM responsible Tor any de-
fc cncy. tScc also Hayden vs.. Demes, 50 y. ",
43l; opinion by Church G. J.)-Judgncnt for the de-
fcnuaDts on the demurrer with costs, with leave to
plaintiffs amend pay mcnt Of costs.
Ramsey DAVIS ct aL-l am Of the opinion after
examining the testimony, that Ravens ana vile must
have been aware that they we're executing m absolute
decd 10 Davis ut the time they appeared before the
notary The verbal agreement on tho part OF Davis
recover was never carried out because its terms
not and could not he complied with by Havens, and
Davis seems to have boon justified in executing and de-
livering the mortgage sought TO be forccoscd. The
MONEYS represented by that mortgage appear all to
have been expended In paving on and Keeping down
cumprances and liens upon tho properly, which Ravens
woud in any event have been obliged 10 pay. There
must he Judgment OF foreclosure favor OF the
plaintiff
Monat vs.. McIaughlin.--Thc demurrer cannot be
sustained for these RESPONSIBILITY does appear
that Tho plaintiff and the defendant, lillian Mclaughlin
all Of full age. Second, while tho seventy
eighth rule requires that in partition cases
where infants are interested the petition
sha state whether not the parties
other lands IN common, and while IL also appears
that the defendant Alfred Mclaughlin rs an infant
nj nj q OpinlOn that rule cunpIicd with
allegation contained In the complaint The allegation
is hat the above described premises and lands tho
only real estate owned IN common by the above named
deicndans II this allegation be true and the defen-
dant by demurriug comedies that II is, how can the de-
iendanis hold other lands in common with the PLAIN
tny They arc equally tenants in common with each
other, whether they the lands alone in
junction with other parties Therefore Is impossible
that tho parties 10 this action other lands
common deem the rule, therefore, to be complied
with by the allegation IN the complaint although the
allegation does not follow tho exact language Of the
rule. Demurrer overruled, with leave to answer over
on payment OF costs.
Borst W. w,nckcL--It is quite clear from
the evidence Of the ne larry who made the protest
that all the notices which he sent enclosed
with inc notice mailed Newark the "a Of March,
directed to the cashier, Rogers Allowing each indor-
ser until the day the his prior
indorser Winckcl Shouts have been rcrvcd the 9Th
| do not understand that the answer givcn by the
notary 10 the question put TO HIM IN references tho
law oil New Jersey has the effect contcndcd for by
plaintiffs counsel. All ,hst the notary appears have
intended 10 be understood as saying that he had
done everything which the law required him 10 do in
TIN or the protest and tho FORWARDING OF the
notice OF protest So he bad. but neither his answer
the statute Of 1865 exempted The parties a
from the necessity Of exercising due diligence in
notifying the Others. wncn the notary has not
directly mailed tho notice to ali the par
ties. William Mes' sent to
him, but enclosed In that sent to Rogers. and he
was entitled under all the decisions rs
early the 9th In po:nt OF fact he received tho
9Th Motion for new trial ,s denied with costs.
Curry VS.. cudiipp ct aL-rhe demurrer IS well
taken Frst--Ihc complaint tails 10 show title the
plaintiff To the bond IN suit. Sccond-As to The ncrs
atlaw Of Reuben Cudiipp. the complaint Is fatally de-
fectve stating that the general assets Of Reuben
Cudlipp were insufficient 10 pay ant discharge the
bond. q Il g.. page 10, 33l Nor does II appear
that any real other property has descended
been devised to such heirs X =. page 7t9 81
Tue defendants must have judgment upon The dcmur-
with leave To the planln TO amend payment Of
costs bill allowed. (Bucktng