The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1877-03-07

DECISIONS.
SUPREME coUaT-cHAMBxRs.

w
Sanford VS. Hanioni Universal Lille Insurance CON-
pany VS.. Foster; kuspert VS.. HanIon; MORRISON IS.
s Shoe suS VS.
Carter: Culver vs. Muller; National shoe aud Leather
Bank VI. Friena; 3lom vs. Cavin Unecr r. Gold
berg: Gassafn VS. Murphy; Zeius vs. Hcndrickson;
McKernc VS.. Lambcrlon; Dundon vs. Naitzfeder;
Maurice w. smith; Mechanics aud Traders Fire In
ams VS.. Dobbs; Same vs.. Same; Duy k.ncx vs.. Bro
kcr: Morris vs. Martin; Chatham National Bank vs.
Fersenhemer; Wainwright ys. .eed Nos ]. 2 and 81;
Levy; Germania Lilo Insurance Company ys
Fever; Frussr ". Wilson; MolIcr - Briggs;
Payne; Oakley Vi. Rollins; New York Life Insurance
aud Trust Company vs. Gardner; Mccr SIS. Lawrence;
Moor vs.. Briggs; Bggs VS.. Bigys aud others Living
sion VS.. Korn no. 81; Universal Lilo Insurance Com
pany VS.. Foster; wiisoD VIZ. Barney: Universal Lc
oBr,sa ys allowance Of 500 is granted
to tue defendant The amount asked .or exceeds tho
amount which the statute permits THIS Court TO grant
Hahn vs. EbcrhardI--S RUE To-
Livinss,on vs. Murphy ---Ruio 13 prohibits me from
foicrring this case the gentleman whose name -
suggested otherwise would inosI chocrIully make tho
order
sutton VS.. Adams Memorandum for counsel
Gicnns Falls Paper Company Va Miller.--I think
that The petitioners arc cnted 10 mandamus Ia tins
case e. H. s., d, aud Ed, 309l
Tlcdinan US. Acxerman.--rwo hundred dollars al
I,shman vs. Blunt-Ordcred that recover account.
Fabriken vs.. Bocti ger.-ln nils case the defendant
received notice III III March that the security
had been died. The defendant should have counter
handed his motion under the case OF Nackcnani vs..
RuOucS "a Sauu hui no sectns 10 DC cHtlticu
10 his iu twenty days within which 10 except to their
suiciency OF the sureiies tsco r. s., ga. 645, as
amended by Laws OF 1875 cha? 10y, Under these CIR
TO be no necessity for usturD-
log tho order oil SIR. Justice Barrett NJ costs al
lowed
Martin VS. Nupan and others this case do not
find either the conpla int the orucr OF reference.
Ferguson VS.. Wntc.--lne examination must pro.
coed No coun or adavils presented by the PLAIN
tii ana applicant appears 10 be made IN good
iaith. (Gienney VS.. Wedding, As s. Court sec 92t
Motion TO vacae order denied, hut without costs.
. Urn Gam ~ hp
AFFIDAVIT william II. L. Lee AS 10 tho regularity oil
the proceedings has not been verified. THIS may DO
upplicd.
10 the pc.ioner TO bring action against tho re-
cever, but no order VIII be made 10 pay mo money
directly
McGrcgor VS.. Marshal -Memorandum. Motion do.
Med, with costs.
Philips va Wood.-The Referees report, which is the
whole pasls OF the proposed decree, has not been
handed lD aud have, therefore,, 10 means ot asccr'
tanning whether the recital in the judgment are cor
rect The papers returned in order that tho refer
ee's report may he supplied
Adams vs. Cappardachi. This case can. think, be
tried in an hour II II should be necessary Tor the
defendant 10 revive for commission he can Obtain an
order show cause, &C., but the order setting tho
the motion Tor a commission u one shall be made the
question whether the delcndant IS entitled TO stay
can be disposed OF.
stewart vs. James-The motion Is to vacate the
order Tor examination for rrcguarity. The irrcgu'
larity specified in the order to show cause al
though appears from the affidavit that II CONSISTS IN
not serving the plaintiffs attorney with notice OF
examination. TINS was an lrrcgularity lMynck vs.
Hummer, How, 455l But by rule 46. where the
motion Is based upon an irregularity, II must be
specified IN tho notice order. That has not been
done here It is alleged on inc part OF the pa'atln
and the action has abated as 10 hc ~ docs not
appear that the case Is in proper condtion ior the
examination Witnesses, the ground that the IL
regularity not specified in the order. The MOTION s
ocned, without COSTS and with leave 20 plaintiff I"
ton until the action OF abated can be resumed.
Tallman VS.. GllIcn.--Motion to dismiss should DO
granted. Sec memorandum.
Bernard vs. Reynolds this case not one Ior
substituted service?
Former VS.. ForncE-It does not appear by whom the
order OF substitution was made.
Hanrahan vs. Hanrahan.--ln this case require
bond
Kerr vs. Reynods.-Granted.
BY Judge Barrett
National Park Bank VIZ. Lord and anothcr.-Sce
In the matter of Morehead-Report confirmed and
Lord VS.. tiffany Motion granted with $40 costs, TO
SUPREME CoURr-CIRCUTT-PART z.
BY Judge Van Brunt.
Doyle, &c, vs New York Eye and Ear In6rmary and
another Case settled.
SUPREME OBSERVATION-DISCLOSURES B.
BY Judge Van Brunt
Bradford Va. Hilton. Judgment for plaintiff Opin-
Penn vs. ward.-Judgment for plaintiff; allowance,
$lo0 Opinion.
SUPERIOR coURT-sPEC1AL TERM
BY Judge Freedman.
Shc,i VS. Buttcriield Ordered day calendar.
UImstcad vs. saltcr. Reference ordered.
Reynolds vs. Crump -Commlssion ordered
Armstrong vs.. Noll ct al-PlalntTs complaint dis
missed.
Belts vs. Observation-Disclosures overrulcd, with loave,
&c
Bacon vs. Clanin-Commission ordered.
Milford vs. The North American Lie Insurance
Company; Reynolds vs. Crump; Hotallng vs. Bucking.
ham, Jr Parsons vs. Hoyt CT al. Brennan VS.. Hey.
man ct AL Manning VS.. Stern and Halsiead VS.. Har.
BY Judge spcir.
Wardrop VS.. Howell ct ali Judgment Tor plaintiff
with costs against the defendant Howell. Memoran-
duin
Vanderxcc ct al VS.. slatcr.-Moton denied, without
siauson vs. Watkins Defendants amendments al.
lowed asscnted TO by the plaintiffs; otherwise dis
allowed.
DAILY VS. Munro-Findings settled and judgment
signed
Helen Cunningham vs.. John Cunningham. There
must be judgment Tor tho defendant. Proof Is INSULT
Gent TO warrant partal divorce
COMMON PLEAs--sPECIAL TERM.
BY Judge Larrenore
Tho Manufacturers and Builders Fire Insurance
Company VS.. Meyer ct al.-Ordcr granted rcturnable
March y.
notice Of clam TO surplus must be furnished.
Matter OF Powers. Application granted
BY Judge Robinson
H'rsch vs. The Continental Lie Insurance Com.
pany Motion ucnied without prejudice TO q renewal
payment Of $40 costs.
by Judge Larremore
Hicks Vs. Lcvy.-Orucr TO plead.
Wailack VS.. Mcrrs ct aL-Findings settled.
Dcvlin vs.. Cohcn.--Ordcr discussing appeal vacated
with costs.
Dcnlipg vs. Scrymscr Order granted.
Matters OF Arcns ana McDcrmotI Applications
granted
The Renshaw Boiler Company VS.. Dougherty ct al -
Complain. dismissed to II. b. 0ougherty with COSTS
The Union Bottng Company vs.. Bccw.--Order
granted.
Matter OF Kuzlc. application granted.
COMMON PLEAS GENERAL TERM.
By Chiei Justice T. T. Daily and Judges. Van Hocscn
and j. h. DAILY.
Dc Ieyer vs. Wade-Motion Tor rcargunen mt granted,
Williams vs.. Substitution Tor leave to 20 10 Court
Of Appeals granted
Cohen ". The National steamship Company. Mo-
ton Tor rcargumcnt denied.
Obcrwarth vs.. Mclean ct al -Judgment affirmed
with sts--Opnlon ny Judge j. +. DAILY.
GENERAL SESSiONS-PART l.