New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1882-03-27
THE COURTS.

A VICTORY FOR THE LACKAWANNA ROAD
The New-York, Lackawanna and Western
Railway Company August 26, 1880 filed Its articles
of association In the Office OF the Secretary OF state de-
csring It's intention to construct railroad from Bng
ha1nton TO Buffalo, passing through Tompkins ana
Schuyler among other counties. The first survey now
ever, showed the route selected 70 be impracu-
cable; hence route surveyed through Che
muns County, and the >proper certificates filed IN
that county On January 90 1881 notice Of this fling
was served upon the New-YOrL Lake Erie and Western
Railroad Company. On February 7, 1881, the EEe
Company served notice Of application 10 change the
route Thus located through Chemung County, on the
ground that the road would be preudicia 70 the
Erie On February t. 1881 and before the application
was heard the New-York Lackawanns and Western
Road passed resolutions changing It's route TO Chemung
County. This proposed route was affirmed DOTH al
Special and General Term On April %. ISL the latter
company filed another map in Chemung County. Inc
Erie Company made another motion 70 change the roue
because OF the omission Of the county OF
fine Of the service Of the notice. II claimed that
the company had right TO construct s road IN me
county OF ChemI1nG nj al IMs ap9uc!uoh wes aisU
denied Then when application was made by the new
for the appointment OF commissioners To oeate the
crossings Of the roads, the Erie Company carried tae
0uesons involved through the various courts 70 the
Court of Appeals which last week save rs decision
sruIU the Judgment below IN favor OF the SeW-I OfA,
Lackawanna and western Rail- oad Co1apsnE.
Court cites the 23d section Chapter u Of the Laws Of
1876, giving the directors Of Railroad by a tWo-
and asus In The proper count" power 20 change their
route % ~ adjoining county In amending As taey ua
trt - -c,y3, C0nnfv I1dg~ Andrews SAYS hat this
was valid exercise by inc directors " the New-Iork
Laokawaura and Western Road OF the Authority CON
s1rrsif mat an Amendment OF The articles u assoca-
ton was necessary but what they did vas equivalent
merit owners or OF third persons NOS affected by the
preliminary action under the twenty third section Inat
acan Is taken ex parte by the corporation. It's action
hpc -ff
confirmation by the Court other authority wen the
directors have by proper yuty determined that he ROAD
snail be built uron a in specified county that
think is location within tho section The deslglaI
when such designation made those Interested nave
right to be heard and T. apply for change OF route
D. Z. Robinson FOR the Erie Road
TWO CASES N REGARD TO ONE ESTATE
The Court of Appeals last week gave two
interesting decisions in that in regard to the
same estate in the surrogate's Court Of Rensselaer,
County. The case OF Snyder against Sherman
appeal from decree of the Surrogate admitting TO
probate the viii of Elizabeth Snyder, the General
Term having affirmed the decree. The probate
was resisted the ground OF lncapacity
and undue influence. Tie Court held o. that
since the adoption of the Code Of Civil Procedure
the Court Of Appeals could examine probate case
upon questions Of fact where tho evidence conflict
ing and that this go although the decided
and appeal taken prior 10 the adoption OF the new
Code ~ the exceptions taken In such cases were
70 be determined by section 2545 Of the Code which
provides that decree OF the Surrogate shall not be
versed FOR errors admitting rejecting evidence
less it Is appear to the Appellate Court that the
exceptant Was necessarily preudiced thereby. This
changes the ordinary rule in regard to sustaining decis
ions upon appeal The admitting the viii to
bate sustained
The other case was that Of Wilton against Snyder
Elizabeth Snyder died before her husband
leaving the viii mentioned above. The Court
of Appeals holds that the paraphernalia Of
married woman, such jswelry, clothing
etc under the of 1862, presmptvely belonged 70
her. This "a quite contrary 70 the common CIV RUE
further than previous case in THIS respect
10 constituting the effect OF The acts in relation 10 mar
ned women and especially in favor of the wlfes per
representatives against the husband ana MA
personal representatives The Court aso holds that the
possession Of money securities by married woman
the presumption that they belong 70 her. and that
presumption is not overcome by showing that she
married before the statutes Of 1S4S and lived with
her husband until her DEATH By the absence OF proof
showing from what source she obtained the money Ihe
Court holds however that the possession OF personal
property By married woman IL common with her nus
band and used in the family though called and recoS
nZed IN the family would not raise the prerun
ton ownership her and that tile IN her directly
must be shown.
spondents IL both cases. L. ~ Parmcnter, Of Troy, the
appeI.ants.