Norwich bulletin., 1919-12-06
IRON WORKS RECEIVERS
 CONTINUED, SIX MONTHS

~tNf tNS@AS StA 5lU1tN
 Before Judge Donald T. Warner at the superior court short calendar and motion lits session here Friday morn ing, attorneys argued a motion for an order determining the liability of re- ceivers as to bonus payments to cer- tain employees.
 The court passed the order allowing the receiver to pay 49 workmen the total sum of S43,312.3 The amounts range from s383.76 to s2.025. The court also passed an order on application made to allow the receiv- CTS to continue the business for six months from Dec. r. MT Cronin, testified that 2600 men are employed and six ships have been launched and there are, three that are 50 per cent. completed. He thought all the work would be done by June i. The receivers were allowed to sell for $10,0o0 a hinged boom travelling tower crane to the Edward F. Terry Manufacturing Go. It has never been erected. The money is to be kept in l tact as there is some question as to whether or not it is covered by the mortgage. The sum of s3s0 was allowed to be paid by the receivers of the Groton Iron Works to H. P. flakes for damage to the house he leased from the com pany.
 1 The following matters on the motion 1 list were disposed of: W l Rachel Horenstein ys.: Jacob Gold
 berg, alias Hendel, motion for iudg- l ment for defendant on the ground that lit has been agreed by the plaintiff to discontinue the case in respect to the first count and that a demurrer
 Ito the second count was sustained
 Jan. 1s. 1917. and no further plead ing has been made by the plaintiff; i; 1 first count stricken from case by or der of court.
 I U. s. Trust Co.. of New York, ct al. Exrs., vs. Shore Line Electric Railway LCo. Application of James T. Sextor to sue receiver, off.
 I Joseph Poretta vs. Otis J. Rogers judgment on plea in abatement. Judge took the papers.
 l Thomas A. Lyman vs. L. Dachis, e
 al., disclosure of defense or foreclos ure, off.
 Herbert Dayton vs. Maude F. G | Dayton Allowance to defend, off. II John A. Moran. Adm, vs. George H
 Bradford, Adnr. 1. Motion to SC
 aside verdict; 2, motion in arrest O
 judgment. postponed.
 May A. Moosbfoker vs. Georg Moosbroker, alimony pendente lite
 Richard c. Davidson, ct al.. ys James Davidson. 1, judgment for par
 tition: 2. motion for decree of parti ,, tion by sale, postponed. ,I Rachel Horenstein vs. Jacob Gold berg, alias Hendel. That amendmen ,t by way of substituted complaint b 1 not. allowed, and that substituted com {. plaint be stricken out, judge took tn papers.
 Benjamin London vs. Garry N i lO'Neil, answer or default, ordered ii : two weeks.
 II William H. Davidson vs. James Da l vidson, ct al. 1. judgment for parti g tion; ?, motion for decree of parti g tion by sale. postponed Y
 Cruver Mfg. Co.,, vs. J. Williar : Stueck, default for failure to. answe . answer or other pleading in ten day! |, Charles E. Gates vs. Nathan I
 Geer. ct al, default for failure t F plead, answer in two weeks. Humphrey Cornell Co, Hs. Hine $ director general of railroads, ct a : permission to file pleading in tw
 weeks granted.
 Frederick A. Saunders vs. Nell n Young Saunders, amendment to con
 plaint granted.
 David Phillips vs. George E. Bit : good, argument of demurrer and mo ltions postponed.
 Frederick A. Barnes vs. Dell Bonvouloir, motion for more particl lar statement. off the list. Mystic River National Bank V I Mystic River Bank, motion for order lof notice, postponed. U. S. Trust Co. of New York, ct a, Exrs., vs. Shore Line Electric Raj way Co.,, 1. application of Arthur At dre. to sue receiver; 2. application Julia Andrew to sue receiver; post poned.
 James Duff vs. Silas Maxson, motto for a su@icient bond for prosecution off; James Duff vs. c. T. Maxson, mo ] Ition for a sufficient bond for prose i Ecution, off. Madison, Admr., vs. Mcintyre, el der of notice. postponed. l Celia Shacnowitz vs. Harry Shas