ÆäÀÌÁö À̹ÌÁö
PDF
ePub

tion denied, with $10 costs. Order filed. See, tral & Hudson River Railroad Company and
also, 163 App. Div. 850, 147 N. Y. Supp. 1112; another. No opinion. Judgment and orders
152 N. Y. Supp. 1112.
unanimously affirmed, without costs.

FRANK, Respondent, V. ROWLAND & GARBARINI, Respondent, v. MOISANT
SHAFTO, Inc., et al., Appellants. (Supreme
Court, Appellate Division, First Department.
April 16, 1915.) Action by Adam Frank against
Rowland & Shafto, Incorporated, and others.
J. V. Judge, of New York City, for appellants.
A. Frank, of New York City, for respondent.
No opinion. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and
disbursements. Order filed. See, also, 152 N.
Y. Supp. 1111.

[blocks in formation]

FRENCH, Respondent, v. CITY OF NEW ROCHELLE, Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department. April 9, 1915.) Action by Ida L. French against the City of New Rochelle. No opinion. Judgment affirmed, with costs.

FREY, Respondent, v. E. REGENSBURG & SONS, Appellants. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department. April 9, 1915.) Action by Isidor Frey against E. Regensburg & Sons. E. L. Mooney, of New York City, for appellants. J. M. Kroskauer, of New York City, for respondent. No opinion. Judgment and order aflirmed, with costs. Order filed.

FRUEAUFF v. MOORE. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department. April Action by Chas, A. Frueauff against 1, 1915.) George Moore. No opinion. Motion denied, with $10 costs. Order filed. See, also, 151 N. Y. Supp. 1116.

FULLER, Respondent, v. CITY OF NEW YORK, Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department. March 19, 1915.) Action by Laura Fuller, as administratrix, etc., against the City of New York. No opinion. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements.

GALVIN v. NEW YORK CENT. & H. R. R. CO. et al. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department. March 5, 1915.) Action by Jeremiah Galvin against the New York Cen

INTERNATIONAL AVIATORS, Appellant (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First De partment. January 22, 1915.) Action by La Garbarini against the Moisant Internation Aviators. W. K. Van Meter, of New York Cit for appellant. B. F. Schreiber, of New Y City, for respondent. No opinion. Judzment and order affirmed, with costs. Order filed.

GARDNER, Respondent, V. CENTRAL PARK, N. & E. R. R. CO., Appellant. (Sepreme Court, Appellate Division, First Departe ment. April 23, 1915.) Action by Faxtor E Gardner against the Central Park, North & East River Railroad Company. C. Mellen, o New York City, for appellant. J. F. Mcintyre, of New York City, for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Judgment and order afirmed, with costs. Order tiled.

MCLAUGHLIN and SCOTT, JJ., dissent, va

the ground that the evidence of negligence ca the part of the defendant was not sufficient to justify submission of the case to the jury.

GARDNER, Respondent, v. ELMIRA, C & W. RY., Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department. May 5, 1915 Action by John Gardner against the Elmira, Corning & Waverly Railway. No opini Judgment and order unanimously affirmed, with costs.

[blocks in formation]

City, for appellant. Louis Steckler, of New | graph Co., 161 App. Div. 781, 146 N. Y. Supp. York City, for respondent. 813. Order filed. See, also, 152 N. Y. Supp. 1113.

PER CURIAM. Judgment and order afSrmed, with costs. Order filed.

MCLAUGHLIN, J. (dissenting). I think that the court erred in refusing to charge the jury that, if the jury find that this accident happened entirely by reason of the fact that the eft-hand horse shied and forced the wagon over against the car, then under the issues presented n this case their verdict must be for the defendant Bahr." I therefore dissent, and vote to everse the judgment and order appealed from, and for a new trial as to the defendant Bahr SCOTT, J., concurs.

INGRAHAM, P. J., and SCOTT, J., dissent, on dissenting opinion in that case.

GERMAN-AMERICAN COFFEE CO., Respondent, V. O'NEIL, Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department. April 23, 1915.) Action by the German-American Coffee Company against John O'Neil. G. W. Harper, Jr., of New York City, for appellant. E. S. Paine, for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements, on the opinion of Page, J., at Special Term, in German-American Coffee Company v. Diehl, with leave to defendant to withdraw demurrer and to answer,

GERMAN-AMERICAN COFFEE CO., Ap-on payment of costs in this court and in the
Dellant, v. DIEHL, Respondent. (Supreme court below. Order filed. See, also, 152 N. Y.
Court, Appellate Division, First Department. Supp. 1113.
March 26, 1915.) Action by the German-Amer-
can Coffee Company against Clarence A. Diehl.
E. S. Paine, for appellant. W. Ferguson, of
New York City, for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements, on De Raismes v. U. S. Lithograph Co., 161 App. Div. 781, 146 N. 7. Supp. 813. Order filed. See, also, 152 N. 7. Supp. 1113.

INGRAHAM, P. J., and SCOTT, J., disent, on the dissenting opinion in that case.

GERMAN-AMERICAN COFFEE CO. v. DIEHL. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, irst_Department. April 16, 1915.) Action by he German-American Coffee Company against Clarence A. Diehl. No opinion. Motion grantd; question certified as stated in order. Orer filed. See, also, 152 N. Y. Supp. 1113.

GERMAN-AMERICAN COFFEE CO., Repondent, v. DIEHL, Appellant. (Supreme ourt, Appellate Division, First Department. pril 23, 1915.) Action by the German-Amerian Coffee Company against Clarence A. Diehl. V. Ferguson, of New York City, for appellant. 1. S. Paine, for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Order (in 86 Misc. Rep. 47, 149 N. Y. Supp. 413) affirmed, with $10 osts and disbursements, on the opinion of age, J., at Special Term, with leave to the efendant to withdraw the demurrer and to nswer, on payment of costs in this court and the court below. Order filed. See, also, 152 . Y. Supp. 1113.

GERMAN-AMERICAN COFFEE CO., Apellant, V. O'NEIL, Respondent. (Supreme ourt. Appellate Division, First Department. [arch 26, 1915.) Action by the German-Ameran Coffee Company against John O'Neil. E. . Paine, for appellant. G. W. Harper, Jr., of ew York City, for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Judgment and order affirm1, with costs, on De Raismes v. U. S. Litho

v.

GERMAN-AMERICAN COFFEE CO. O'NEIL. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, the German-American Coffee Company against First Department. April 30, 1915.) Action by John O'Neil. No opinion. Motion for leave to appeal granted; questions certified. Order filed. See, also, 152 N. Y. Supp. 1113.

GIBBS v. ARRAS BROS. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department. March 19, 1915.) Action by Benjamin Gibbs against Order signed. Arras Bros. No opinion. Application granted.

(two cases). (Supreme Court, Appellate DiviGINSBERG v. TRIANGLE WAIST CO. sion, First Department. March 19, 1915.) Action by Henrietta Ginsberg against the Triangle Waist Company. No opinion. Motion granted, unless appellant complies with terms stated in order. Order filed. See, also, 151 N. Y. Supp. 1118.

GLOVER, Appellant, v. NATIONAL BANK OF COMMERCE, Respondent. (Supreme April 9, 1915.) Action by Laura Glover, as Court, Appellate Division, First Department. administratrix, against the National Bank of Commerce. G. A. Honnecker, of New York City, for appellant. J. Quinn, of New York City, for respondent. No opinion. Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. See Glover v. Nat. Bank of Commerce, 156 App. Div. 247, 141 N. Y. Supp. 409. Order filed. See, also, 151 N. Y. Supp. 1118.

GOELDNER, Respondent, v. NEW YORK TELEPHONE CO., Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department. May 5, 1915.) Action by Ernest B. Goeldner against the New York Telephone Company.

PER CURIAM. Judgment and order reversed, and new trial granted, with costs to appellant to abide event, unless the plaintiff will

stipulate to reduce the verdict to $370, and if
plaintiff so stipulates the judgment is so modi-
fied, and, as modified, judgment and order
unanimously affirmed, without costs.

GOLDNER, Respondent, v. NEW YORK
TELEPHONÉ CO., Appellant. (Supreme
Court, Appellate Division, Third Department.
May 5, 1915.) Action by William Goldner, an
infant, by Ernest B. Goldner, his guardian ad
litem, against the New York Telephone Com-
pany. No opinion. Judgment and order unan-
imously affirmed, with costs.

In re GOODMAN. (Supreme Court, Appel-
late Division, First Department. March 12,
1915.) In the matter of Elias B. Goodman.
No opinion. Application denied. Settle order
on notice. See, also, 158 App. Div. 465, 143
N. Y. Supp. 577.

GORTIKOV, Respondent, v. GORTIKOV,
Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Divi-
sion, First Department. March 26, 1915.) Ac-
tion by Benjamin Gortikov against Marion
Gortikov. M. M. Leichter, of New York City,
for appellant. J. Fischer, of New York City,
for respondent. No opinion. Judgment affirm-
ed, with costs. Order filed. See, also, 163
App. Div. 950, 148 N. Y. Supp. 1117.

GOTTFRIED v. GRIFFENHAGEN. (Su-
preme Court, Appellate Division, First Depart-
ment. March 19, 1915.) Action by Elias Gott-
fried against Max S. Griffenhagen. No opinion.
Application denied, with $10 costs. Order
signed.

GOULD, Respondent, v. GOULD, Appellant.
(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First De-
partment. April 1, 1915.) Action by Kathrine
C. Gould against Howard Gould. M. W. Lit-
tleton, of New York City, for appellant. A. F.
Spiegel, of New York City, for respondent.
No opinion. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and
disbursements. Order filed.

GRACE, Appellant, v. TOWN OF NORTH
HEMPSTEAD, Respondent. (Supreme Court,
Appellate Division, Second Department. March
19, 1915.) Action by Lillius Grace against the
Town of North Hempstead. No opinion. Mo-
tion granted, without costs. See, also, 152 N.
Y. Supp. 122.

In re

In re GRADE CROSSING COM'RS OF
CITY OF BUFFALO. (Supreme Court, Ap
pellate Division, Fourth Department. March
10, 1915.) In the matter of the application of
the Grade Crossing Commissioners of the City
of Buffalo for the appointment of commissa
ers of appraisal to ascertain the compensa
to be paid to the owners of and parties inte
ested in lands claimed to be injured by the
change of grade, etc., and owned by the George
Urban Milling Company and others. Proced
ing No. 101. No opinion. Motion granted, ani
questions certified to Court of Appeals reset-
tled. See, also, 151 N. Y. Supp. 148, 1119.

GRAF v. MACKAY. (No. 7108.) (Supre
Court, Appellate Division, First Department
Appeal from Special Tera,
April 1, 1915.)
New York County. Action by Richard Gr
against R. Gordon Mackay. From an order de
nying a motion to make complaint more definite
Modified ar
and certain, defendant appeals.
affirmed. H. H. Gibbs, of New York City, fe
Frank Sowers, of New York Cit
appellant.

for respondent.

PER CURIAM. The order appealed from is
modified, by requiring the complaint to be mak
more definite and certain, as stated in par
graphs 1, 2, and 3 of the demand set forth £
the affidavit of the defendant's attorney. As s
modified, the order is affirmed, with $10 cust
and disbursements to the appellant.

GRAFTON, Respondent, v. BALL, Appelant
(Supre ne Court, Appellate Division, Second De
partment. March 12, 1915.) Action by Robert
Grafton against John Oscar Ball. No opini
Motion denied, with $10 costs. See, also, 104
App. Div. 70, 149 N. Y. Supp. 447.

GRAVES, Respondent, v. HERSPERGER,
Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Di
March 10, 1915
sion, Fourth Department.
Action by Chas. B. Graves against Adam Her-
sperger. No opinion. Order affirmed, with $10
costs and disbursements.

GRAY v. FORBES. (Supreme Court. Af-
pellate Division, First Department. March 19,
Forbes. No opinion. Motion granted, with $19
1915.) Action by George Gray against James
costs. Order filed.

GREEN, Respondent, v. STEINBERG. Ap-
pellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division.
Second Department. April 1, 1915.) Act
by John Green against Ella V. Steinberg. No
opinion. Judgment and order unanimously af

GRECO et al. v. BECKER et al. (Supreme
Court, Appellate Division, Second Departme
March 26, 1915.) Action by Michael Greco and
another against Rose Becker and others. No
opinion. Motion granted, without costs.

GRADE CROSSING COM'RS OF
CITY OF BUFFALO. (Supreme Court, Ap-firmed, with costs.
pellate Division, Fourth Department. March
10, 1915.) In the matter of the application of
the Grade Crossing Commissioners of the City
of Buffalo for the appointment of commissioners
of appraisal to ascertain the compensation to
be paid to the owners of and parties interested
in lands claimed to be injured by change of
grade, etc., and claimed to be owned by the
Barber Asphalt Paving Company and others.
Proceeding No. 97. No opinion. Motion grant-
ed, and questions certified to Court of Appeals
resettled. See, also, 151 N. Y. Supp. 1119.

GREENBERG, Appellant, v. GOLDBERG,
Respondent, et al. (Supreme Court, Appellate
Division, First Department. March 12, 1913
Action by Abraham Greenberg against Mayer
Goldberg, impleaded with others. H. R. Elias,

New York City, for appellant. N. S. Goetz, New York City, for respondent. No opinion. der affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursents, with leave to plaintiff to amend on paynt of costs. Order filed. See, also, 150 N. Supp. 1088.

GREENBERG, Appellant, v. GOLDBERG & REENBERG, Inc., Respondent. (Supreme urt, Appellate Division, First Department. arch 12, 1915.) Action by Abraham Green-g against Goldberg & Greenberg, IncorporatH. R. Elias, of New York City, for appelat. E. Fixman, of New York City, for reondent. No opinion. Order affirmed, with 0 costs and disbursements, with leave to intiff to amend on payment of costs. Order ed. See, also, 150 N. Y. Supp. 1088.

In re GREENWOOD. (Supreme Court, Aplate Division, Second Department. March 5, 15.) In the matter of William Greenwood, attorney. No opinion. Motion granted.

GRIFENHAGEN et al., Respondents, v. HILDEN & HANCOCK, Appellant. (Sueme Court, Appellate Division, First Depart-nt. April 23, 1915.) Action by Max S. ifenhagen, as Sheriff, etc., and others, against hilden & Hancock. A. Massey, of New York ty, for appellant. L. J. Wolff, of Brooklyn, - respondents. No opinion. Judgment and ler affirmed, with costs. Order filed.

[blocks in formation]

HAAKENSON, Appellant, v. ADAM REINHARDT & BROS., Respondents, et al. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department. April 9, 1915.) Action by Daniel Haakenson against Adam Reinhardt & Bros., impleaded with others. H. C. Smyth, of New York City, for appellant. E. P. Mowton, of New York City, for respondents. PER CURIAM. costs. Order filed.

Judgment affirmed, with

LAUGHLIN, J., dissents.

HAGARTY, Respondent, v. MOYKA et al., Appellants. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department. April 1, 1915.) Action by Helen Josephine Hagarty against John Moyka and another.

PER CURIAM. Without expressing an opinion as to whether the complaint states a cause of action, we are of opinion that the answer puts in issue the allegations of the complaint, and it cannot be regarded as frivolous. The order is therefore reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements, and the motion denied, with $10

costs.

HAGMAYER v. NOVELTY STAMP CO. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division. First Department. April 30, 1915.) Action by Catherine Hagmayer against the Novelty Stamp Company. No opinion. Application denied, with $10 costs. Order signed. See, also, 151 N. Y. Supp. 1004.

HALSTED, Appellant, v. SIMMONS, Respondent. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department. March 26, 1915.) Action by Florence Halsted against Julia G. Simmons. M. L. Towns, of New York City, for appellant. W. W. Foster, of New York City, for respondent. No opinion. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements, with leave to plaintiff to amend on payment of costs. Order filed. See, also, 151 N. Y. Supp. 1120.

HAMER, Appellant, v. NASSAU ELECTRIC R. CO., Respondent. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department. March 12, 1915.) Action by Emily V. Hamer against the Nassau Electric Railroad Company. opinion. Judgment and order unanimously af

GUIRIZINSKI, Appellant, v. AMERICAN
ADIATOR CO., Respondent. (Supreme
urt, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.
arch 26, 1915.) Action by Bernhardt Guiri-
ski against the American Radiator Company.
PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with
sts. See, also, 151 N. Y. Supp. 1120.
LAMBERT and MERRELL, JJ., dissent.
GUTTA PERCHA & RUBBER MFG. CO.,
pellant, v. HOLMAN, Respondent. (Su-
eme Court, Appellate Division, First Depart-firmed, with costs.
nt. April 30, 1915.) Action by the Gutta
rcha & Rubber Manufacturing Company
ainst Charles J. Holman, as treasurer, etc.
Pierce, of New York City, for appellant. W.
Fisher, for respondent. No opinion. Judg-
nt affirmed, with costs. Order filed. See,
30, 150 N. Y. Supp. 1088.

G. W. MARTIN & BRO., Appellant, v. HELLHOOS, Respondent. (Supreme Court, pellate Division, First Department. April , 1915.) Action by G. W. Martin & Bro. ainst Elizabeth Shellhoos. F. Taylor, of w York City, for appellant. P. Cantline, of wburgh, for respondent. No opinion. Orr reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements, d motion denied, with $10 costs. Order filed.

Νο

In re HAMMOND. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department. April 30, 1915.) In the matter of James B. Hammond, deceased. No opinion. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. Order filed. See, also, 163 App. Div. 877, 147 N. Y. Supp. 884.

HANSON, Respondent, v. HANSON et al., Appellants. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department. March 18, 1915.) Action by Aimee L. Hanson against Henrietta Reutti Hanson and others, as committee of the person and property of said Walter Lathrop Hanson, an incompetent person.

PER CURIAM. Order (in 88 Misc. Rep 244, 151 N. Y. Supp. 861) reversed, without

costs, and place of trial changed to Columbia county, with costs to appellants to abide event. HOWARD, J., dissents.

HARBISON-WALKER REFRACTORIES CO., Appellant, v. 119TH ST. REALTY CO., Respondent. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department. May 7, 1915.) Action by Harbison-Walker Refractories Company against the 119th Street Realty Company. F. M. Avery, of New York City, for appellant. S. T. Stern, of New York City, for respondent. No opinion. Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. Order filed.

HARDIN et al., Respondents, v. ROBINSON, Appellant. (No. 7158.) (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department. Aprií 16, 1915.) Appeal from Special Term, New York County. Action by John R. Hardin and others, as trustees, etc., against George R. Robinson. From an order continuing an injunetion during the pendency of the action, defendant appeals. Reversed. Chester A. Jayne, of New York City, for appellant. Elbridge L. Adams, of New York City, for respondents.

HART, Appellant, v. FULLER, Respondent. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third De partment. May 5, 1915.) Action by Natalie A. Hart, as administratrix, etc., of Palmer A. Hart, deceased, against Bernice L. Fuller. No opinion. Judgment unanimously affirmed, with costs.

HART v. HOPWOOD. (Supreme Court, Ap pellate Division, First Department. April 30, 1915.) Action by Louis C. Hart against Everard B. Hopwood. No opinion. Application denied, with $10 costs. Order signed. See, also, 151 N. Y. Supp. 871.

HARTMANN v. ARMSTRONG. (No. 7100.) (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department. April 1, 1915.) Appeal from Special Term, New York County. Action by Edward A. X. Hartmann against Paul Armstrong. From an order denying a motion to vacate an order for the examination of a witness before trial, defendant appeals. Modified and affirmed. Phelan Beale, of New York City, for appellant. Geo. W. Files, of New York City, for respond

ent.

PER CURIAM. There is no case made upon these papers for the issuance or continuance of PER CURIAM. The order appealed from is an injunction pendente lite. The order appeal-modified, by restricting the examination to mated from is therefore reversed, with $10 costs ters concerning the receipt and contents of the and disbursements, and the motion denied, with letter specified in the affidavit of the plaintiff's $10 costs. Order filed. attorney, and by striking out the provision for the production of such letter. As so modified, the order is affirmed, without costs.

HARGRAVES, Respondent, V. WICKWIRE STEEL CO., Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department. March 26, 1915.) Action by Susan Hargraves, as administratrix, etc., against the Wickwire Steel Company. No opinion. Motion for leave to appeal (in 151 N. Y. Supp. 1120) to Court of Appeals denied, with $10 costs.

HARLEY, Respondent, v. PLANT et al., Appellants. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department. April 23, 1915.) Action by James Harley against Hannah E. Plant, executrix, etc., of Humphrey L. Plant, deceased, and another. No opinion. Judgment affirmed, with costs.

HARTWELL, Respondent, v. FARRELL, Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department. March 18, 1915.) Action by William L. Hartwell against Jerome J. Farrell. No opinion. Order affirmed, without costs.

HARTWICK POWER CO., Respondent, v. MIX, Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department. May 5, 1915.) In the matter of the application of the Hartwick Power Company relative to acquiring title to certain real estate in the town of Milford, Otsego County, as against Edith Wilber Mix. No opinion. Order affirmed, with costs.

March

HATCH, Appellant, v. LAKE SHORE & M. HARMON, Respondent, v. PRENTICE et al., Appellants. (Supreme Court, Appellate Di- S. RY. CO., Respondent. (Supreme Court, Apvision, First Department. March 12, 1915.) pellate Division, Fourth Department. Action by Margaretta T. Harmon against Ilen-26, 1915.) Action by Cora May Hatch, as adry L. Prentice and another. H. S. Sayers, of ministratrix, etc., against the Lake Shore & New York City, for appellants. C. C. Clark, of Michigan Southern Railway Company. Brooklyn, for respondent. No opinion. Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. Order filed.

HARRIS v. TED SNYDER CO. et al. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department. April 9, 1915.) Action by Charles K. Harris against the Ted Snyder Company and others. H. C. Smyth, of New York City, for appellants. A. H. Rosenfeld, of New York City, for respondent. No opinion. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. Order filed. See, also, 163 App. Div. 956, 148 N. Y. Supp. 1119.

PER CURIAM. Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. See, also, 159 App. Div. 596, 145 N. Y. Supp. 781.

KRUSE, P. J., and LAMBERT, J., dissent.

HAUPTMAN, Respondent, v. NEW YORK EDISON CO., Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department. April 9, 1915.) Action by Mayer Hauptman, as administrator, etc., against the New York Edison Company. T. H. Beardsley, of New York City, for appellant. J. F. McIntyre, of New York City, for respondent. No opinion. Judgment

« ÀÌÀü°è¼Ó »