New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1891-01-15
COURT or APPEALS DECISIONS.
MANY HANDED DOWN BY THE SECOND DIVISION
-soME OF THE MORE IMPORTANT ONES

MANY handed DOWN III III Oh O''D ~ i|t'-'
-,OME OF THE MORE IMPORTANT oNLS'
Albany. jan l4-Amons the more important de
cs.on, handed down to-day 10 the C""Ft.oi Appeals
second Division. were The following:
mi, vu- a ..r for di,1:,r, IN which me dcichGaHt
denied ue alleged mar.'t' me rn'u nn,'I ,to
bat asserted that TIE relation H'd ben 'tc'eu ~!
verbal agreement Her theory W.. 1t ~ I ,'nS
wished To- conceal to- marriage ron nls ld'icI "Iu
that therefore kept "cIot' Al'"r q Hhp'' ~
habiatou The pAinul ana ot'HuHn' . Pi 49, vi
the latter murI.-l. and upon me u'au ni ~ M w
married tbo second time The phinun bad Likewise
luIIl.d and While married -erycd upon the defendant
int CONT, fellow and now the Court Of App.al' dc.
,r.. a.ln- her cu!mln, and ali sing tn judgment
IF the supreme CONT. General Icrni from "h'cH 'he
..o,r pouai brought suit against the Metropolitan
r'.yf..i I.lir,,,d COMPANY Ipuu claim against that
',,..,,r,ti,u n-lgurd To- HIM damages Inflicted ~
f-1J upon certain premises owned ~ one ~. ~
di, ~ iIc NEGLIGENT ml.urr 800 which the drrn'ahl
.I ,,.,. ,,,-ifIrtcd n the front u ~td premises \
non -ult Vu, ordered IN the NnPir'' ,v''' anu '''
Appellate Court now a'rH- that Judgment
The full lot Of the decisions Ha"ucu "o"" ""' 80
fonpW,:
u.,ut. Icnuir l. Iuuucu. appellant. at 'ii' slti,
10. pOudcut. Motion tor icn fnWcd 'c"'"I' WIZ" CIV
Au,u-tu, J. Genet appellant, ost PRECEDENT OF , t,1
Delaware and nud-on 'dnh '"' P''S' '''P''''''
,l,n,. Il, amend l,utiltUr denied.
N,.,, U,,I r,rciirlN resp udcnf and appellant,
at Frederick Hood ana another, dppc'iull' ana H.
To-. III
,r,,,,r, IN" interest upon +lo.Oup from b,'tmH'i .,
i-..,. July u. l7-', ana a. 81" mo''"c" ''''"''"
DAN, IT, Gunner. appellant, AIT. David iLiteI IT
al rec poud,ut,. susan h. rover. 1i"""'O ~ ~ 49,
,ppndcu. au. the Ncw-lorh Lthc E,c t"u
.ulrUad Company, appellant h"p'' y, ~ ~,
,t ti. A,f. ',ppiitan FlrN Atcd Railroad COMPANY Ic
,pludcut: Elizabeth \. - Ihait ic- 'ci, n'u "i
prlaIt, az. Joshua Hthl, anu ''''"'.'' "i. t
,uG r--p,ndcnt,. rhuua> l.. Hodin'l' cAf'l'v. ~
pq.d,"t as tge o@ =, ,y " nya Sr oS%a.
,pprlant Lehman ". 1ylcr, appellant, Az. |'tT
Cooper, rc,po.d,rt; David stewart 'pI"ihn'' a.
t.ni- f. huntington, respondent, Nice Nihdl~' APP
liant. ait To-, y. Winan.. re- pondrnt. Lili'"orn
rntmL ct ai. r,ponden,i AZ W, H. on,,t any, a.'I
thc rity OF iuilalO. pOndcnt. William laNIoi' -
pond"n agl. raoch Aorgan. son, No. npp I'm
William II. Wood. appellant aIn inc MNoL ., NV ,
Yorl. ,r-popdcnt 1"orgc -C1itcr respondent dDi
hc brooklyn and LouF Island 'a'ir kuir"aa con.
Yohu Bought appellant. JudGHcnt affirmed, with
John liarman appellant ag;. Henry L. sage. ct al.
,-,pondcut-: phiip carpenter. rc>pondrnt "st. the
Sew York. cwliavcu and Il3Iiiod IAliTtu 'oi, on,
ihre, i. shepherd. ct al r'pondicni' .,l -:
cpmcy, appellant. at Wallace NGi'N' !, l'Iu'"'
-,,r1h g. C@Th. appellant. ast' no. n",''ii ,,j
Unppert appellant order affirmed, ana iudrmcnt al
-olnic rendered against appellants. with cost.
VI Iacl-on. 0. apondout. ait the civ of RochcNter.
appellant. jgdsmcnt affirmed WITH r2 ,l, M'th ID"
The Moropollian Lilc .nrance Company ,I,r a up
vcr,-d aud Judgment ordered for planth on verdict
with ct, ..,.n, o,, y Law Of a.. re.
l.. wood, appellant. deI '. u Lay GU Ave. -
spondcnts Appeal dismissed with costs. ,.
Nathan Cobb and another respondents. ag'i hnn"
Wells. appellant Mary &. swing, on her own behtiI.
appellant. agt Henry :. Day and another r',ppndelt
T.. :. Jalcry ct al. respondents. agt > Davis b,"
another appellants: Edmund Blunt, appellant; as,;
Elmer barrett. respondent. Judgment reversed an"
Warren Ucaman appellant aCt. Lewis l.. Todd re-
spOndcnt That part Of the order Appealed irol re
vcr-rd. with costs. -. , o,on on
John \. X. DuvaI agt. II. u. Wcllnian. orncr az,
pcacd from reversed. and order oi "chcra icr'" w
City Court Affirmed, with costs. . ,,., IN
The Union Cemetery Association Of huitho; het
snnudcnts act the cts OF Euhl!0. appcl'aht' ia,
,r,rt Of Judgment Appealed from reversed ana inc
complaint dismissed. with costs In AL court ,r,cr
David j. Noye,, appellant. agt. 1htrcr.i y. Ninr
enn and another. respondents. or1cr ihrn5u, '' ~.
Judgment ab-Qluc rendered In favor ot
tIc eject that she De relieved from the CONSEQUENCE,
of her default in the payment o the a.-c'Sy't III
costs Of the appeal tn the "eheri Term '''' III '"
cour;. .,. ar, More
lanes G. Outwatcr, respondent, ast =. N" .ne,
unrllaut Judgment modified - as q hdJudEe ili'
h., fence mentioned In the complaint T. h9l uPpn
. lands Of the plaintiff. but upon the me priWFrn
" lands ~ pltinf and defendant. and thus modified
nirmcd without costs in TINS court " ci'"el P'''