The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1877-03-09

rule 90, the defendant In the answer may up tho
privilege the defendant has awaited herself Such
plea being made in bar and = countcrclairn,
required no reply"
DECISIONS.
SUPREME CoURr-cHAMBxRs.
BY Judge Lawrence
Jonas vs. Marks Kahn vs. Eberhardt; Palmer vs..
Day; Manhattan Savings Institution VS.. Hoffman;
Same Va Same; Frohevein vs. sweenY; Pereso VIZ
granted
Lamb vs. Mckinley. -Memorandum for counsel.
Burrell VS.. er.--Memoranaum.
Griffin and others vs. Taylor. explanation required.
In the matter Of Conway-The blanks In the pro-
posed order must be supplied
Commercial Bank Ncwman-An allowance OF
five per cent on the sum recovered Is granted to the
plaintiff
In The matter OF the roceivership OF the Guardian
Savings Instituton-l desire to havo q copy OF the
order which II Is proposed to vacate
Godfrey Henderson. This cannot, in my
opinion DO tried in an hour-Motion denied.
Judd VS.. judd want to know who the commits.
sioner is to whom It Is proposed 70 send this com
mission
Former VS.. Forncr-1. In this an order of pub
cation appears have been granted but when or by
whom does not appear 2. There Ia no proof OF the
publication Of the summons under the order. Tho
personal service IN the State OF California made
February 2, 1877, II does not appear that six
weeks ana twenty days have elapsed since such
vice. L. The papers do not show any right to order
OF reference g. The copy order submitted In response
70 my previous memorandum 10 not the order therein
called for. Application denied
whether ths motion is Drematurey made It must be
denied account OF defects IN the OF both
ties. l. The moving affidavit appears 10 have been
verified before tho plaintiffs attorney, which Is rreg
uar 2 The afndavit OF defendants attorney 10 the
date OF The service OF the notice OF trial Is not verified
The motion may be renewed, but II Is NJ present de-
nied without COSTS
HubbeIl vs. Commercial Mutual Insurance Company;
Earl Kelley; Calen vs. Gibbeman; Bempp vs..
Schultzer; Voghts VS.. Northumberland.
ST. John VS. Maxium Gas Machine Company; Thomp-
son vs.. Thompson; Beard OF a. VS.. Lawson; Nudge
vs.. PUG; Smith Webb Pe,sei vs. Wright; Bush
VS.. Hackett; Metropolitan Life Insurance Company Va
Sullivan mos. and 4l-0rders granted.
SUPERIOR CONVERSATIONAL. TERM.
BY Judge Freedman.
Wncheli VI. Winchell-Motion denied.
Knapp vs.. Roche.-See memorandum.
Babcock vs. Bonnell, Jr.- Comm lssion ordered.
jackson Prime.-Reference ordered See memo
randum.
Higginbo.ham VS. Do witt-Movon denied, With $40
The Mutual Life Insurance Company vs. Davis ct
aL-Moton denied. Memorandum.
Singleton w. Singleton.-Thc motion for judgment
must DO denied Memorandum
Gebhardt vs. Linkert ct al. The New York Lifc In
surance Company VS.. Chase ct al. and Wolff vs.. Hoyt
Phyfo vs. vnton.-Judgment for plaintiff on demur-
rer, with leave to defendant to answer payment OF
costs
Looenstein VS. Haverty ct al Cunningham vs. Tho
Second Avenue Railroad Company: Reynolds vs.
Crump, and Putnam ct al Van Ripper Of a.-Orders
granted.
Roderigas The East River Savings institution
Findings settled and plaintiffs amendments allowed.
SUPERIOR coURT-oENERAL TERM
BY Chief Justice Curtis and Judges sedgwick and
Spcir.
May sohuyler.-Motion to dismiss appeal denied
with costs.
COMMON PLEAs--GENERAL TERM
BY Chicf Justice G. P. Daily and Judges Van Hoescn
and J. f. DAILY.
Cohen vs.. Hart and Murphy va Moss-Held that
ned in this court notice Of argument for tho Common
Pleas General Term. cannot be gwen Of issue
be hlod.
COMMON PLEAs-sPECrAL TERM.
BY Judge Larremore
Diblos vs. Lang-keference ordered
Hemein vs.. Goldback.-Order on demurrer settled
spingarn ct al vs. Levy ct aL-see memorandum
for counsel
The New York Life Insurance Company va Phillips
OF al. uhree cascs); matters OF Luckows, Rohman,
Johech aud neutrality-suspicious. granted
Lawrence Serrc Antoine Serre Report Of referee
confirmed and decree of divorce granted to plaintiff
Schcncke vs.. Rowne Demurrer ovorrulcd, with
leave TO answer on payment OF costs.
Helm vs. Tho Mutual Lio Insurance Company
Complaint dismissed, with costs
ph1nix VS. Dupuy.-rne suficiency Of the affidavit
was decided by the Judge who made the order Is
remedy Is by appeal from tho order application
10 the Judge by whom IL was granted. Motion denied,
BY Chief Justice G. p. Daily.
Matter Of Geo, &c.-Application granted, but order
must be drawn in accordance with the form
communicate.
MARINE CoURT-CHAMBEHs.
By Judge McAdam.
Rosster Hencken.-OpipOu filed.
Bell VS.. Schaulcr.-Ths Is not q proper case for
granting leave TO bring experimental action. NO.
ton Denied
Schroeder VS.. Holke; Ranney va Lichtens.sin- DE.
cisious fled
Bowles VS. Levy; Brockway Va. Ibbo.son; Rubbins
vs.. Hay.-Motions granted
Hatch VS.. McSwyncy. ndant discharged from
arrest.
Worth VS.. Elwood- -Subs.itutons OF attorneys or.
dered.
Best vs. Roach -Prisoner discharged under Four.
tcen.day act
Rice VS.. Bunn-Order for examine alton set aside
Goldman vs. st. john Frank VS. Roscn berg: Car
rngton VS. Ferguson plants dismissed,
Barnowsky VS.. Jacobs two cascsl -Bailable attach
ments ordered.
voorhis VS. Hays--Procecdings dismissed
Kaliz VS.. Hitz -DIscont!nuance allowed without
COSTS
spngarn vs.. Davis tthrce casesl-Defendant dis
charged
Schoeman VS.. Groesbeck -Attachment vacated.
Loans vs. Dooling.-Dcfauh opened on usual terms
(Sce papcrs)
Tho remainder OF the Chambers decisions we're pub.
shcd yesterday by mistake under the name OF Justice
Goepp
GENERAL, SESSTONS pApr