The New York herald., 1878-02-05
DECISIONS.
SUPREME COURT cHAMBEas
BY Judge Donoh ue.

h. y.
lntyre VS. Oaden; Robinson VS. Corcoran the Society
OF the New York Hospital VS.. Coe; weymann Vs.
Of AnraE Preston; The Eas, River Savings lns.i.u.
tion VS.. Allen; Wood vs. kea.; Fitzgerald VS. smith !;
White vs. Lerley; the Greenwich savings Bank vs.
Youngs; Van Loan w. Gates; IN the matter Of +.
DlcSie; the Germania Fire Insurance Company vs..
the Memphis and Charleston Railroad Company;
Robinson vs. Muller, Boyer vs. Decourcey; Greene
vs. McFnrc; vandervecr vs. Curry Smith vs. O'Rely !;
| tho Citzcns Savings Bank VS. Grswold; tho Bank OF
Company VS. Mallory; Peterkin vs. Craig; the Man
haitian Life Insurance Company VS. McCahili, Nos.
l, q ana 4; Clark va Merriam; Thomas Parsons
Lowell vs. Cocxrois; the Bank OF New YORK VS.. Arm.
strong; Nordmann vs.. Goldsmith; White VS. Drake;
Luke; tho shaw and Wilcox Company VS.. Auch moody
| Van Wick VS. Bayer; Meyers VS. Dant; Williams vs.
Cosne; Phyie vs. Mouse; Williams vs. Cosine, and
Lesser VS. Hymes-Granted
Lyddy vs. Hsrway.-Denied.
White VS.. jennings; Dress va Meyor; Lockwood va
| White, and Remsen vs. Rem cn-Orders granted
Cazade vs.. Herkloz Put in the order whose
motion the order Is entered.
| Crane vs. Crofutt utt-Dismlsscd, without costs.
KIDD dvs.'Renly.-Mouon denied
Crane Capitalization dismissed.
Jarman The Lake Shore and Michigan Southern
Railroad Company; Raberg VS.. Same; Drake vs.
Same, aud Monroe vs.. Same.-Granted i've per cent
| Babcock VS.. Babcock-Motion denied without costs.
By Judge Barrett.
DeBonay vs. Cary.-Granisd.
Devoe vs. Devoc Order granted
BY Judge Law renee.
MaoiarIspd vs.. Mora; matter OF smelling, and Hedge
Lyon VS.. .Munker.-Mcmorandum for counsel.
| In the matter OF certain mechanics lens.-what
| authority is there Tor thisr
| Lippett VS.. Cohn.-rhe motion Tor leave to ils y
| supplemental answer is granted upon payment OF
costs OF notion and tho costs of the defendants at.
torncy be taxed Tho motion to vacate the oraer
OF refereucc Is denied, win leave TO after
| supplemental answer has been served.
Taylor vs. irwin. Il tnink that the motion to make
The complaint more definite and certain must bo de-
nied See culver vs. hoster, II Abbott, 4cb, and
marks oil Sutherland j., at p 400 Hastings III
Der, Is How, $50 Motion denied, with costs.
| The Oriental Paint Works VS.. Hart-rhe petition
lnGt Al, irtr
the Circuit Court OF the United States and the
rty is IN compliance with the statute The order ap
Piled for must therefore be granted
| Dress vs. Guijahr.-The motion for the appoint
ment OF receiver Tor the rents, &c. in this case Is
inadcquacy OF the security are not sufficiently strong
TO JUSTLY the appointment oil receiver. Costs OF
motion are granted TO the defendant
Bates vs. Spingate-rhe defendant Is entitled only
to costs which havo been occasicned by the de-
murrer. The costs Tor proceedings before trial
not allowed (Crary Vs. Atwood, Abbott 22Oj, nor
Is he eptitlcd to charge term lee, tho
reached and argued during the term whom 1t FIRST
placed upon the calendar The charge for subsequent
proceedings before trial was properly allowed Tho
clerks lee disbursement caused by tho demurrer
and the defendant Is entitled TO it,
In the matter OF G. GeisInger, o lunatc.-Case de-
cided by Judge Brady
| Lydcckcr W. Ahern TO grant this motion would
very much resemble deciding tho against the
| fcndant in advance Tho defendant appears DO
lawfully in possession Of the property mentioned as
pledgec, not owner, and the Court ought not
a motion TO deprive him of that possession. Motion
| denied, but without COSTS
|
right IN asking tor reference to determine the
amount due from HIM and that all the motions stand
over until the referee report. The reference must
proceed from day 10 day. Sec memorandum ior
counsel
| The Importers and Traders Bank VS.. McDowelL-
The mouon is denied, with costs. See memorandum
Tor counsel
Thomas VS.. Thomas Referred to Moses Ely, to as
certain and report what, II anything, should be al
lowed tothe plaintiff temporary aiimopy or for u
counsel les herein. The references wIll proceed two
days notice, ana be continued from day unless
ADJOURNED by the referee IN his discretion or good
| cause.
| Richardson va. The United States Life Insurance
Company.-rhe order o. the 3Jth oil November last
does appear TO have been literally compiied with
Tor the reason that certain arrangements we're made
between the attorney Tor the respective parties
lation TO the nspccttn Of the policy which arrange
menls were for the con ice of sald attorneys
shall no therefore, grant attachment this case,
but shall direct the defendants to comply within five
Gays from this date with the order OF November 80 by
making the deposit therein directed
| Meyer vs. Beckcr-Oroer granted.
| Stuyvcsant vs. Lcitcr.-fhe validity Of the assign
against the defendants creditors, that fact be
male TO appear in an appropriate action. Under the
costs should be imposed. Motion denied, without
| Gusts.
sUPhEME COURT-CIRCUIT
BY Judge Lawrence
Schroeder VS.. The World Company.-Order settled
| sloane VS.. Warnings ct aL-Sco opinion.
Marshall vs. RoUorison.-l desire TO hear counsel
further ON this matter Soc memorandum for counsel
Baholmer VS. RsichardL The deienuant's counsel
has nicd his brIcf but l have
the testimony or the piaintin's counsefs Drio.
| SUPREME coUKT-srEcIAL TERN
By Judge Van Worst
steinbrecher vs.. voss and anothcr.-Complant dis.
missed. Opinion.
Reilly Vs. Dillon ct al.-JudgmenG Tor plaintiff.
| Opinion.
| SUPERIOR CoURT-sPECIAL TERM
| By Judge Sanford.
Ranbetshek vs. Blank. -Engrosscd ordered on
| M;uer 20 Ivpch-Order acnv,uu ,oo,,or to- ~ 49,
trial.
Fitch VS. Martin.-order staying proceedings
| Chambers et al VS.. Merck -Ordered on day calen-
| dar Tor February 20
Adopn vs. Central PARK, North and East River
| Railroad Company.-Undertaking approved.
| kirkland vs. CochereiL-Reiercnce ce ordered
| Jung VS.. KauimaD-Order continuing injunction
Rlfllara VS.. Hart.-Oraered' on short calendar for
February 10.
Bowery Savings Bank vs.. Klein Ct al-Relerenco
ordcred.
| Maryo OF al. VS.. Fouvert o. al Same VS. Same
| Oakley vs. Hyett; SiiverDy vs. James; Handy VS..
Siede-Orders granted.
SUPERIOR COURT GENERAL TERM.
BY Chief Justice Curtis aud Judges Sedgwick and
Freedman.
Wray VS. Fedderkc.-J I'D gme mt and order affirm ed
with costs opinion by Chicf Justice Gurus.
Carleton VS.. Darcy CT aL-Ordcr affirmed, with
w'ck
Fleming VS.. Tho Consolidated Fruit Jar Company
Judgment affirmed, with costs OPINION by Judge
| ROBINS OF al VS.. FaIconer. affirmed, with
| $40 costs and d'sDursements. Opinion ny Judgc
| Sedgwck
Hatch VS.. Bowea-Order affirmed, with costs, aud
with leave to defendant to answer payment OF
| COSTS Opinion Ly Judge Freedman.
Kranich VS.. Reynolds judgment affirmed with
| costs. Opin,on by Judge Freeman.
Egan VS.. Waish.-Order affirmed, with costs. Opn-
| ion BY Judge Freedman
Pollen VS.. Lawrence ct aL-Order and judgment
affirmed, with costs opinion by Judge Freedman
Isaacs VS.. New York Plaster Works-Ordcr re-
verscd, With costs, and taxation reopcnea see opin.
| ion. 0pinon by Judge Freedman.
4 NJ IatA In .uF and Int. Ia.
Henncquin ct AL vs. Buttcrilcd ct al.-Judgment
affirmed, with costs. OPINION by Judge Freedman.
| Abecasis vs.. Gray.-Judgment aud order affirmed
| with costs. Opinion by Judge Freedman.
| Cohen VS.. Goldman. Judgment and order affirmed
| with costs. opinion by Judge Freedman
| BY Chiei Justice Curtis and Judges Sedewlck and
| Freedman
Nehcr w. McDonough.-Order appealed from af.
| hrmcd, with COSTS. Opinion by Judge Curtis
BY Chef Justice Gurus ana Judge Freedman