The New York herald., 1878-12-14
THE COURTS.
Battledore and Shuttleoook Between
Two Landlords
A BEWILDERED TENANT
The ConstitutionaIiy Of the Board Of
Appotionment

Patrick Leary. Of No. 81 Oak street. seems to have
become the slate on which Is to be worked out the
legal problem whether he is everybodys nobody's
tenant His own preference. he says, il to be the
latter but he is not opposed to paying fair rent to
well defined landlord whose right there are none
to dispute. Charles T. Dana. claiming to be Leary
landlord but whom the latter was In doubt about
ceptine owing to rival claimants to the same posi-
ton. brought proceedings before Judge Clancy. in
the Second District Court. to have him ousted for
non-payment of rent. On the return day Mr.. Leary
put in acounter affidavit denying that Mr. Dana his
landlord by Of the fact that he had conveyed
the property to John Shaw. On the trial Judge
Clancy decided in favor of the alleged landlord and
Mr.. Leary. under protest, paid the amount Of the
rent into Court and its clerk turned themoney
to Dana. Now comes John Shaw. the other claimant
to landlorship, and in the Marine Court commences
proceedings against poor bewildered Leary to
turn him out Of his homo for non-payment
of the same rent which he had paid into
another court in obedience to its decree in favor of
another This to trial before Judge Goepp.
Mr.. Henry @. Dennison representing Shaw. and
Messrs. Sweeney and Fletcher representing Leary.
Mr. Dennison. on the part of landlord No. O. the only
genuine he claims, moved for judgment in favor
OF his client the ground that there counter
affidavit filed on the part of the tenant This motion
was opposed by MI. James Sweeney. representing
alleged owner had the right to put in such affidavit
the statute giving such right to any party either
possession or claiming possession of the premises
in question. Mr.. Dennison insisted in reply that
the statute only referred to, and gave the right
file counter afdavit. to tenant in possession or
one claiming possession and thus raise the question
of landlord and tenant; otherwise. he said q ques-
ton of title would be raised and the Court would
lose jurisdition in . proceeding of this char
scter. Judge Goepp took this view of the
question, but decided to receive the affidavit
on the part of Mr.. Dana in order that the latter
might be placed in position to compel Mr.. Shaw,
his rival to prove his landlordshp of the premises
Dana there offered in evidence the Judgment Of
Judge Clancy in his favor After long argument
between counsel as to tho admssbiity of this evil
dence, Judge Goepp ruled 1t out. Proof was then
submitted on the part of Shaw of his ownership by
deed from the grantee of Dana It is the validity Of
the title of grantee which Mr. Dana seeks dispute
and he asserts that Shaw had knowledge Of its inva
lidity when he took the title under which he
now claims ownership; but evidence on this
point had to be ruled out on the ground
that in disposscss proceedings the Court could
not decide question to the validity Of title. At
the conclusion of the testimony Judge Goepp, al
though intimating that upon the testimony before
favor OF Shaw. said he would delay entry Of judg-
ment f~w davs so that the defeated parties might
have opportunity to take such further legal steps
they might deem necessary to protect themselves
In the rights which they insist.
"Bcgorra," says Leary the innocent tenant, a. he
heard the probable result zone landlord is enough in
these hard times. and he departed. consoling him
ironicA tone the couplet of Tom Moore:-
Oh how happy I'D be with other,
Were tother desr charmer away.
Or vords N chat effect