New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1883-02-20
THE COURTS.
ELEVATED RAILWAY LITIGATION.

THE METROPOLITAN SEEKING TO HAVE n JUDI
MENT OPENED.
Judge Freedman, in tho Superior Court
Chambers has granted an ORDER TO show cause reHFh
able Tomorrow why he jndgmeutenerad IN Deccn'p'r T.
1881 In the suit brought by the New-York Elevated
Railway Company against the Manhattan ana
METROPOLITAN companies should not he opened IEe
order was obtained by Barlow Olney as attorneys LOT
the Metropolitan Company 1t IA alleged In the aud'tS
upon which the order Is based that the Judgment was Oh
tanned by the consent of the company at time whe inc
company was under the management OF Jay GOul' ana
his friends who sacrificed the company TO the Manhattan
Company in which they very largely Interested Tue
Ncw-York Company in Jnly 1881 began the suit IN me
Superior Court 10 have the lease unier which ltS
road was held the Manhattan Company declared tor-
feted and the restoration OF its prop rty III sou up
In the complaint the insolvency OF the Manhatth 'o
pany and its failure to pay the rent due the planH
ana other failures perform the covenants o. The lease
The METROPOLITAN Company was male defendant In
the suit as party n interest and put in an answer In
which the insolvency of the Manhattan Company Is dc
MED on information and b;ef. The answer admits inc
failure the Manhattan Company to pay the rent de'
but declared that the failure was solely cause! D. IN
functions OF the courts In OclOOcr ISL ne 90
the three companies made what are known a Tue DC
tobeT agreements, in which the relal was Ienceu on
10 to per cent the capital stock ~ the Metropolitan
and New-fork companies me iertnteass H. 49,,
Manhattan Company by the Atlorncy-Genefa,
TO have the charter OF The comply , GGel Ea
pany again. and the Attorney Generals suit wa dscD-
tinued. Tao N nhattan Company then put IL u suppe
mental in winch II sets up the dlscOnhuahce OF
Attorney Generals SUIT and the October agreements
and SAYS tua all the differences OF tue Il rec copiIes
anicably and airy settled On tne consent OF all
the parties the findings submitted 10 JldSe
TruaX t. the that all the differences OF the cOnpa-
had settled, that the October agreements were
valid aud binding law, and that the Manhattan COM
pany hal pusse-sOu OF the roads and was solvent NO
evidence was offered by the plaintiff aud there was no
trial. and nothing IN act was even passed upon ny Juge
Truax The Court simply found what all lre' 10 the
suit asked find. Judgment was directed to be ell
terel IN accordance with the findings. -,
II il now alleged by the Metropolitan Company that
its directors had more power TO consent lo Jug
mcnt declaring the October agreements Ntd thah 'h'f
had to make agreements without Inc consent OF
tue stOcknO ders. The company wish 10 nave tle
Judgment set aside because Il technically bc nHru
.ainst II the brought to nave the agreements
declared Invalid. In tlr suit I'm the supreme court
brought by stockholders Of the MctrJpo al Com
pany to nave The ODcr agree nts declared VOID the
Man attain Company actually pleaded the judgment
OF Judge IruaX in bar ~ the acliOn
Judge Van Brunt yesterday ma lie an order ylc' iG a
Judgment entered b" default by the VI tropnt n lie
waited Railway Company against the Manllii n Railway
Company for abO $4,000, for money loaned. Inc
Judgment entered on the ground that there hal
been rregularty In the service OF the dcichGants
answtr Ju e. Van Brunps order IL on tho condition
that they to the put on the Calendar Tor
next mOatn.