페이지 이미지
PDF
ePub

and 122 New York State Reporter Appellants. (Supreme Court, Appellate Divi PERKINS, Appellant, v. SMITH, Respondsion, First Department. May 6, 1904.) Pro-ent. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Sea ceeding by the people of the state of New York, ond Department. June 10, 1904.) Action by on the relation of the Merchants' Real Estate Walter C. Perkins against James B. Smith Company, against James L Wells and others. No opinion. Judgment of the Municipal Court D. Rumsey, for appellants. H. W. Hayden, for affirmed by default, with costs. respondent. No opinion. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements.

PIERSON, Appellant, v. CLARK, Respond

ent. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third PEOPLE ex rel. ROBINSON v. STURGIS, Department. May 20, 1904.) Action by Wels Com'r. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, lington S. Pierson against J. Emmett Clark. First Department. June 17, 1904.) Proceeding No opinion. Judgment and order unanimously by the people of the state of New York, on affirmed, with costs. the relation of Archibald Robinson, against Thomas Sturgis, commissioner, etc. No opin PIETROFESA, Appellant, v. DELAWARE ion. Motion denied.

L. & W. RY. CO., Respondent. (Supreme

Court, Appellate Division, First Department. PEOPLE ex rel. SHIELS v. GREENE, May 6, 1904.) Action by Rocco Pietrofesa Com'r. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, against the Delaware, Lackawanpa & Wetern First Department. May 6, 1904.) Proceeding Railway Company. W. McArthur, for appel. by the people of the state of New York, on lant. W. L. McGuire, for respondent No the relation of John H. Shiels against Francis opinion. Judgment affirmed, with costs. V. Greene, commissioner. No opinion, Motion denied, with $10 costs.

In re PORTER. (Supreme Court, appellate

Division, Third Department. May 4, 1904.) ID PEOPLE ex rel. STRAUSS, Respondent, v. the matter of supplementary proceediags instiWELLS et al., Appellants. (Supreme Court, tuted by Nelson W. Porter, as assignee, etc, Appellate Division, First Department. June in an action entitled "A. C. Atkins & Co., Lim10, 1904.) Proceeding by the people of the ited, v. Edwin R. Bryant." No opinion. Order state of New York, on the relation of Isidor affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. Strauss, against James L. Wells and others. D. Rumsey, for appellants. W. B. Hornblow PORTER v. MAGNETIC SEPARATOR er, for respondent. No opinion. Order affirm-Co. (Supreme Court, Appellate Dirision, First ed, with $10 costs and disbursements.

Department. May 13, 1904.) Action by AleI

ander T. Porter against the Magnetic Separator PEOPLE ex rel. WALRATH et al., Re- Company. No opinion. Motion denied. spondents, v. BOARD OF ASSESSORS OF BROWNVILLE et al., Appellants. (Supreme

In re PYE._(Supreme Court, Appellate DiviCourt, Appellate Division, Fourth Department. sion, Fourth Department. May 24, 1904.) ID May 3, 1904.) Proceeding by the people of the the matter of the examination of Margaret A. state of New York, on the relation of Jane Pye, a judgment debtor, in supplementary proWalrath and another, against the board of as- ceedings. No opinion. Order affirmed, with sessors of the town of Brownville and others. $10 costs and disbursements.

PER CURIAM. Judgment and order modi. fied, so as to provide that the costs of the pro

RANDALL, Respondent,

UNITED ceeding be awarded and taxed against the de- STATES LEATHER CO., Appellant. (Sufendants in their official capacity, and not per preme Court, Appellate Division, Third Departsonally, and, as so modified, affirmed, without ment. May 11, 1904.) Action by Oscar S. Raqcosts of this appeal to either party. Hleb, that dall against the United States Leather Comthe finding of the referee that the defendants pany. acted in bad faith is contrary to the evidence. PER CURIAM. Judgment and order affirm

ed, with costs. PEOPLE ex rel. ZUHR v. GREENE, Com'r, PARKER, P. J., not voting. SMITH, J., Respondent. (Supreme Court, Appellate Divi- dissents. sion, First Department. June 10, 1904.) Proceeding by the people of the state of New York, on the relation of Joseph Zuhr, against Francis COLLEGE FOR ORPHAN AND DESTI

RANKINE, Respondent, V. DE VEAUX V. Greene, as commissioner. C. D. Ridgway, TUTE CHILDREN, et al., Appellants. (Sufor relator. T. Connoly, for respondent. PER CURIAM. Writ dismissed, and pro-partment. May 17, 1904.) Action by William

preme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth De ceedings atfirmed, with costs.

B. Rankine against the De Veaux College for O'BRIEN and INGRAHAM, JJ., dissent. Orphan and Destitute Children and others.

PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with PERELES. Appellant, v. ROCHESTER costs, upon opinion of Childs, J., delivered at GERMAN INS. CO., Respondent. (Supreme Special Term. 85 N. Y. Supp. 239. Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department. WILLIAMS and STOVER, JJ., dissent. May 26, 1904.) Action by Maurice Pereles against the Rochester German Insurance ('om RANNEY, Respondent, v. VAN COTT, Appany. No opinion. Judgment and order aflirm- pellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division ed, with costs.

Fourth Department. May 10, 1904.) Action

So opia., PIETRITA

L. & W.R!

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

PORTER 1. apers on appeal.
Dugement W re REIDEL. (Supreme Court, Appellate

an. A! I. 7-20 sion, Second Department. June 17, 1904.) | Division, First Department. June 10, 1904.) ibe de STATES 11. Pd, with costs. *.but lebt. Vor OBERTS, Respondent, v. WILSON et al., for respondent.

PER CURLY by James A. Roberts, as receiver, against contention relates solely to questions connected Com'r,! PARKER, P. Liment affirmed, with costs.

RAVKIVE B: ellate Division, Second Department. Juve dict is sufficiently supported by the evidence. rocs (OLLEGE FOR gway. TI’TE CHIME pro antzent. Vir me SAM! Tem 27 (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third others. No opinion. Motion denied, with $10

WILLIAMS 1X lee against Masonic Life Association of

4 Ser Tak sma kepure

late D:Ti-! PERING dna L. Ranney against Cornelius Van Cott. ROCHESTER TRUST & SAFE DEPOSIT 1. Pe pinion. Order afirmed, with $10 costs and Co., Respondent, v. TRUESDALE Appellant. Velvet, ami Lecirsements.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Delees Exxe Water C F222

partment. May 3, 1904.) Action by the Roch13 otters. Sore REDMOND. (Supreme Court, Appel-ester Trust & Safe Deposit Company against playden, for särsec je. Division, Fourth 'Department. May 10, George Truesdale. No opinion. Judgment af

:). In the matter of the judicial settlement firmed, with costs.
PIEROX 1 ie accounts of Thomas F. Redmond, as
at. * Itor. No opinion. Order affirmed, with

ROSE v. WELLS. (Supreme Court, AppelSTURGIS war costs and disbursements.

late Division, Third Department. May 11,

1904.) Action by Tobias L. Rose against HarPrim: AED, Respondent, v. LIVERMORE, Ap

rison Wells. No opinion. Motion denied, at. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, 1 Department. May 20, 1904.) Action by et al. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division,

ROSENFELD V. LANCASHIRE INS. CO. Reed against George Livermore, as sur Fourth Department. May 26, 1901.), Action by

& partner. No opinion. Order modified, Mortimer C. Rosenfeld against the Lancashire Com riking out that part thereof relating to the Insurance Company and others. GREENE, Mey & *aission and to reading the same on the trial DRCzas tree new issue, and, as so modified, affirmed, read as follows, viz. Judgment and orders

PER CURIAM. Decision modified, so as to Riing Ruler out costs of this appeal.

reversed, and new trials ordered, with costs to

abide event, on the appeals from the judgDICH V. COCHRAN et al. (Supreme ments. No costs allowed on the appeal from t, Appellate Division, First Department. the orders.” 13, 1904.) Action by Lorenz Reich against S.' Cochran and others. RCURIAM. Motion granted, both ap- MAN, Respondeut. '(Supreme Court, Appellate

ROSENKRANTZ, Appellant, V. SILBERto be argued together, with leave to plain: Division, First Department. May 6, 1904.), In o bring on appeal for argument in the event the matter of Yetta Rosenkrantz against Leib defendants are in default in service of case Silberman. S. Horkimer, for appellant. L. Leexceptions, or in printing and filing print- vene, for respondent. No opinion. Order af

firmed, with $10 costs and disbursements.

,
he matter of the application of Frank D. In the matter of Charles W. Saacke. A. Bosko-
el to lay out a highway in the town of witz, for appellant. D. P. Hays, for respond-

and the assessment of damages therefor.ent. No opinion. Order affirmed, with $10
pinion. Order of County Court of Suffolk costs and disbursements.
ty confirmed.

SALTZMAN, Respondent, v. FRIEDMAN et CHARDS, Respondent, v. RAMSAY, Ap- al., Appellants. (Supreme Court, Appellate nt. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Term. May 5, 1904.) Action by Harry Saltznd Department. June 3, 1904.) Action by man against Harris Friedman and others. ed Richards against Malcom Ramsay. No From a judgmeut for plaintiff, and from an orion. Judgment of the Municipal Court af- der denying

a motion for a new trial, defendants appeal. Affirmed. Shapiro & Shapiro, for ap

pellants. Henry Kuntz and Sigmund Horkimer, ellauts. (Supreme Court, Appellate Divi PER CURIAM. No point is made by appel

of , Ý B. . themThey

appear to be mostly questions of fact, which

were properly submitted to the jury. The recBINSON, Respondent, V. BROOKLYN ord discloses no errors in the admission of evi

, Supreme . or , . 1904.) Actiou by William H. Robinson The judgment and order must be affirmed, with

costs. ast the Brooklyn Heights Railroad Com

No opinion. Judgment of the Municipal t affirmed, with costs.

SAMPSON et al. v. OTTINGER et al. (Su

preme Court, Appellate Division, First DepartOBLEE, Appellant, V. MASONIC LIFE ment. May 13, 1904.) Action by Samuel J. ,'Y OF WESTERN NEW YORK, Respond- Sampson and others against Marx'Ottinger and artment. May 4, 1904.) Action by Minnie costs. tern New York. No opinion. Judginent SANDFORD, Appellant, V. ERIE R. CO.. aimously affirmed, with costs.

Respondeut. (Supreme Court, Appellate Divi

[ocr errors]

Company.

a!. Re WAS OF

In re PTE

[ocr errors]

RANDALL

9 per premiet

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

7 Pro

preme Court, ,

B. Rankine 1-3 eot

Or; han er

PER CIRILI. TER' Mats, que

reles

m! RAVVET. Eesti Erni pelant op

Fourth Department

and 122 New York State Reporter sion, First Department. June 10, 1904.) AC-, against the Metropolitan Street Railway Comtion by Eva Sandford, as executrix, against the pany. G. A. Rogers, for appellant. B. H. Erie Railroad Company. E. D. O'Brien, for ap- Ames, for respondent. No opinion. Order alpellant. F. B. Jennings, for respondent. No firmned, with $10 costs and disbursements. opinion Order affirmed, with costs.

SILER v. BATH & H. R. CO. (Supreme SAN DONATO, Appellaut, v. NATIONAL Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department CONTRACTING CO., Respondent. (Supreme May 10, 1904.) Action by Charles Siler against Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department. the Bath & Hammondsport Railroad Company. May 24, 1901.) Action by Eligio San Donato No opinion. Motion for reargument denied, against the National Contracting Company. No with $10 costs. Motion for leave to appeal to opinion. Motion for reargument denied, with the Court of Appeals denied. $10 costs aud disbursements.

SIXSMITH, Appellant, v. PROWITT et al., SATTERLY, Appellant, v. ERIE R. CO., Re- Respondents. (Supreme Court, Appellate Diri. spondent. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, sion, Second Department. June 10, 1904.) de Second Department. June 17, 1904.) Action tion by Thomas Sixsmith against 'J. Thornton by Charles S. Satterly against the Erie Rail- Prowitt and others. No opinion. Motion to road Company. No opinion. Motion to dismiss dismiss appeal granted, with $10 costs. appeal granted, with costs, unless the plaintiff pay $10 costs and perfect his appeal within 20 SLOANE v. SPALDING. (Supreme Court, days. On compliance with these conditions, Appellate Division, First Department. May 13, motion denied, without costs.

1901.) Action by W. & J. Sloane against Roba

ert H. Spalding. No opinion. Motion granted, SAXTOX, Appellant, v. NATIONAL CASH so far as to dismiss appeal, with $10 costs. REGISTER CO., Respondent. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department. May

SMITH, Respondent, 3, 1904.) Action by Frank J. Saxton against HEIGHTS R. CO., Appellant. (Supreme Court,

BROOKLYN the National Cash Register Company. No opin- Appellate Division, Second Department. Jule ion. Judgment atfirmed, with costs.

17, 1904.) Action by Margaret Smith against

the Brooklyn Heights Railroad Company. So SCHILLING CO. v. ROBERT H. REID &

opinion. CO. et al. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, $10 costs.

Motion for reargument denied, with Third Department. May 25, 1904.) Action by the Schilling Company against Robert H. Reid & Co, and others. No opinion. Motion denied. SMITH, Appellant, v. NEW YORK CENT.

& H. R. R. CO., Respondent. (Supreme Court, SEEMAN, Respondent,

CENTRAL Appellate Division, Fourth Department. May BREWING CO., Appellant. (Supreme Court, 17, 1904.), Action by Jacob Smith against the Appellate Division, Second Department. June New York Central & Hudson River Railroad 3, 1904.) Action by Edward Seeman against Company. No opinion. Judgment and order the Central Brewing Company. No opinion. affirmed, with costs, on authority of same case, Motion for reargument denied, with $10 costs. reported 164 N. Y. 491, 58 N. E. 655. Motion for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals deried.

SMITH, Appellant, v. SHELDON, Respond

ent. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third SHACKLEFORD, Respondent, MCIN- Department. May 4, 1904.) Action by William TYRE, Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Smith

against Alice Sheldon. No opinion. Or. Division, Second Department. June 10, 1904.) der affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. Action by Thomas W. Shackleford against Thomas A. McIntyre. No opinion. Judgment SMITH, Respondent, v. SHELDON, Appeland order unanimously affirmed, with costs. lant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division,

Third Department. May 20, 1901.) Action by SHANESY, Appellant, v. McKEE et al., Re-William Smith against Alice Sheldon.

No spondents. (Supreme Court, Appellate Divi- opinion. Appeal dismissed, with $10 costs and sion, Second Department. June 3, 1904.) AC-disbursements. tion by John Shanesy against Harry D. McKee aud William W. Beers. No opinion. Judgment SMITH, Appellant, v. YOUNG MENS and order unanimously affirmed, with costs. CHRISTIAN ASSY OF BATAVIA, N. Y.,

Respondent. (Supreme Court, Appellate Divi. SHEPARD v. SHEPARD. (Supreme Court, sion, Fourth Department. May 17, 1904.) de Appellate Division, First Department. May 13, tion by Alice Smith against the Young Men's 1901.) Action by Henry B. Shepard against Christian Association of Batavia, New York Florence A. Shepard. No opinion. Motion No opinion. Judgment affirmed, with costs. granted.

SNELL, Respondent, v. COMBS, Appellant. SHERIDAN, Appellant, V. METROPOLI- (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth TAN ST. RY. CO.,. Respondent. (Supreme Department. May 24, 1904.) Action by Sarah Court, Appellate Division, First Department. E. Snell against Frank L. Combs. No opinion. May 20, 1901.) Action by Aunie Sheridan Motion to dismiss appeal denied.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

er H. у 12 L CASH so farsic letiert,

SUITE DE 1941. HESHITS!! So op.D- Ay se 1

17. 141 RFID &

[ocr errors]

the Barles Robert Spurgeon for admission to the by one Sutton against one Hollender. No opin

SVITH, St.) In the matter of John F. Steeves and t. Jude les lletreme Court, Appellate Division, First De April, 1904.) Action by Louisa Sutton against

s referred CIVI, pany. ste Seth aming

date Division, First Department. SUTI H. Reena TOKES, Respondent, v. BRADLEY, Ap- The finding in this respect is sustained, even

Ti ni Ikast Department. May 20, 1904.) Action by witnesses, and it should not be disturbed. This 1. Re IT Solliam E. D. Stokes against William Bradley. being so, the case at bar is controlled by the Dri on...20 Ottinger, for appellant. Prirt. French

13. t20 br Aly1.) In the matter of the application of EdLoD No opinion. “Edward L. Stout et al. v. J. Henry June 3, 1904.) Action by Josephine M. Sweet, 9 (br. 20 d. d L. Stout and another in an action enti-Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

SVELL Resound ER CURIAM. meme luttest V MITH, J., not voting.

OLI.'Irene Csts.

New York 8ste Rocher 41 A VIELL V. CORNWELL. (Supreme Court, STRONE, Respondent, V. INTERURBAN HD 61 allate Division, Fourth Department. May ST. RY. CO., A ppellant. (Supreme Court, Ap

-!??!184.) Action by George Snell against pellate Term. May 5, 1904.) Action by John les o iam Coruwell.

ÑO opinion. Motion for P. Strone against the Interurban Street Rail=to appeal to the Court of Appeals denied.way Company. From a judgment for plaintiff, 1 SILER BIS on for reargument denied, with $10 costs. and from an order denying motion for a new

Affirmed. TUNAL 2

trial, defendant appeals.

Bayard re SNOOK et al. (Supreme Court, Appel H. Ames and F. Angelo Gaynor, for appellant.

June 3, Louis Steckler, for respondent. et te Base E. Division, Second Department.

.) In the matter of the application of h I

PER CURIAM. Upon the evidence given by Augustus Snook and others, as executors, both parties the case was one for the jury, and

of John B. Snook, deceased, for a per- in its submission no reversible error was comwiwibe l'art of lign_tory writ of mandamus.

mitted by the court in its charge; the defendISTYSYTELOR CURIAM, Irrespective of any other ant having made no request for further in.

tion, we think that, in order to obtain a structions, or that additional questions should
damies with shoulde afirmatively appear that be specifically submitted. Nor are the damages
are of full age, as required by section judgment and order should be affirmed, with

of the Code of Civil Procedure. Order costs.
* Lapped - ned, with $10 costs and disbursements.
SOAVE T'INDLER v. GIBSON (two cases). (Su- al., Appellants.

SULLIVAN, Respondent, v. BIERSACH et

(Supreme Court, Appellate le Court, Appellate Division, First Depart. Division, First Department. May 20, 1904.) E. May 6, 1901.) Actions by Annie Spind- | Action by Nellie Sullivan against Christian īgainst Mary E. Gibson. No opinion. Mo: Biersach and another. W. H. Lyons, for ap3 granted, so far as to dismiss appeals, with

pellants. G. H. McAdam, for respondent. costs of one motion.

No opinion. Order affirmed, with $10 costs

and disbursements.
re SPURGEON. (Supreme Court, Appel-
Division, Secoud Department. June 7,

SUTTON HOLLENDER.
In the matter of the application of Court, Appellate Term.

(Supreme

April, 1904.) Action No opinion. Application granted.

ion, Judgment affirmed, with costs. See Trus

tees of Cananda iguav. Foster, 156 N. Y. 354, re STEEVES et al. (Supreme Court, Ag- 50 N. E. 971, 41 L. R. A. 554, 66 Am. St. Rep. 11.1.8.9. Siv costs.

ite Division, First Department.
No opinion. Motion granted.

SUTTON, Respondent, V. HOLLENDER,
CEINBACH V. PRUDENTIAL INS. CO.

Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Term.

Frederick Hollender. From a judgment for ment.

May 6, 1904.) Action by Caroline nbach against the Prudential Insurance E. Brodsky, for appellant. Milton Mayer, for

plaintiff, defendant appeals. Affirmed. John

respondent. CER CURIAM. Motion denied.

PER CURIAM. · The question whether the AN BRUNT, P. J., dissents.

defendant transferred the possession of the

premises to a tenant in part only, and reserved re STEVENSON. (Supreme Court, Ap- a sufficient part to make him liable for the con

June 17, dition of the coal hole in question, was sub1.) In the matter of Philip Stevenson. No mitted to the jury as a question of fact under ion. Motion denied.

a charge quite favorable to the defendant, and

determined by them in favor of the plaintiff. ant.

,
W. B. Wait, for reasoning of

Trustees of Canandaigua v. Fosjondent. No opinion. Order modified, by, ter, 156 N. Y. 354, 50 N. E. 971, 41 L. R. A. king out the provisions designated “first” 554, 66 Am. St. Rep. 575, and the recent deci

"second" in the order, and, as modified, sion by this court of Sutton (plaintiff's hus'med, without costs to either party.

band) v. Hollender, ubi supra. The record dis

closes no reversible error. The judgment and i re STOUT et al. (Supreme Court, Appel- order must be affirmed, with costs. Division, Third Department. May 11,

SWEET SCHLIEMANN. (Supreme ber."

as trustee, etc., of Francis Fely, deceased, Order affirmed, without against J. Schliemann.

PER CURIAM. The submission in this case is defective. See Marshall v. Hayward, 67

June 17, 575.

denied.

& H ERE her. VTRAL Aposte Itasi Ciurt, 11,

12

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

1*4.] der adre, L

to disbunemis

Ihre meat

SUITH, 4 CHRISTIANA 'Rextent

v.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

and 122 New York State Reporter App. Dis. 137, 73 X. Y. Supp. 592. The par- ! the judgment sbould be reterged asim tick lay remedy the defect within 20 days. trial ordered, with costs to as to 203 If this is not done, the proceeding will be dis , event. missed.

TRACY et al., Respondects. Y. KIPELE TANAS, Respondent, v. MUNICIPAL GAS et al., Appellants. (Soprese Court er CO., Appellant (three cases). (Supreme Court, Division, First Department. J. 17. Appellate Division, Third Department. May Action by Alberta P. Tracy and oubers 28 11, 1901.) Actions by Elias Tanas, as admin. Lomis H. Kircher and o:bers. Fros istrator, etc., of William Dimitri. John Foli, ment in favor of plaintiffs, de estarts ap and Anton Mila, each deceased, against the Reversed. Edward W. S. Jobesten for ageMunicipal Gas Company. No opinion. Order lants. Walter S. Logan, for responder's afirmed, with $10 costs in one action and dis PER CURIAM. For the reasons stated is bursements.

the opinions in the case of Tracy . Fres ben

with handed down) 88 N. Y. Supp. 874, the TANENBAUM V. JOSEPHI et al. (Su- judgment should be reversed, and a destra preme Court, Appellate Division, First De ordered, with costs to appellants to atice esetz partment. May 13, 1904.) Action by Moses Tanenbaum against Isaiah Josephi and others. ELECTRIC R. CO.. Appellant. (Sapreme

TROTT, Respondent, v. WESTCHESTER No opinion. Motion denied, with $10 costs.

Court, Appellate Division. Second Departs.ent.

June 3, 1901.) Action by Wilbeltrina Iris TANENBAUM v. LIPPMANN. (Supreme against the Westchester Electric Railroad CeeCourt, Appellate Division, First Department. pady. No opinion. Judgment of the MonjeMay 20, 15*1.)Artion by Moses Tanenbaum ipal Court affirmed, with costs. against Gustav Lippinann. No opinion. Motion granted, so far as to dismiss appeal, with $10 TUCKER, Appellant, v. TUCKER Re costk.

spondent. (Supreme Court, Appellate Dirisioa, Second Department. June 3, 1304.) Actino

Mary Adelaide Tucker against Edwin H. Tack TANENBAUM, Respondent, v. NEUBERGER et al., Appellants. (Supreme Court, Ap- er. No opinion. Order affirmed, with $10 costs

and disbursements. plate Division, First Department. May 6. 1.M.) Action by Moses Tanenbaum against Meyor Neuberger and others. A. Furher, for Appellate Division, Third Department. May 11,

In re TROY PRESS CO. (Supreme Court, appellants. E. Hall, for respondent. No opin- 1944.) In the matter of the application of the ion. Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. Troy Press Company for a writ of mandamus

directed to the Secretary of State. No opinion. TEN EYCK, Appellant, v. BOOKMAN et Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disburse al., . Respondents. (Supreme Court, Appellate ments. Division, Fourth Department. May 10, 1904.) Action by Clarence Ten Eyck, as receiver, etc., against Le Roy Bookman and others.

UNITED STATES, Appellant, v. UNION

SURETY & GUARAKTY CO, et al., RespondPER CURIAM. Order reversed, with $10 ents. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, See costs and disbursements, and motion denied, ond Department. June 3, 1901.) Action by the with $10 costs. Held, that the complaint United States of America, suing for the use states only one cause of action.

and benefit of Walter R.' Jones, against the

Union Surety & Guaranty Company and Harold TEN EYCK, Appellant, v. BOOKMAN et R. Dillingham. No opinion. Interlocutory judg. al., Respondents. (Supreme Court, Appellate ment affirmed, with costs. Division, Fourth Department. May 10, 1904.) Action by Clarence Ten Eyck, as receiver, etc., VARIANO V. CITY OF NEW YORK. (Suagainst Lucinda Bookman and others. No preme Court, Appellate Division, First Depart. opinion. Order reversed, with $10 costs and ment. June 10, 1904.) Action by Gaetano Varidisbursements, and motion denied, with $10 ano against the city of New York. No opinion. costs. Held, that the complaint states only Motion denied, with $10 costs, one cause of action.

VILLAGE OF THERESA, Respondent, F. TRACY et al., Respondents, v. FALVEY et SANTWAY, Appellant, et al. (Supreme Court, al., Appellants. (Supreme Court, Appellate Appellate Division, Fourth Department. May Division, First Department. June 17, 1904.) 10, 1904.) Action by the village of Theresa Action by Alberta P. Tracy and others against against Frederick L. Santway, impleaded, and Catharine Falvey and others. From an inter- others. No opinion. Order affirmed, with $10 locutory judgment entered on a decision after costs and disbursements. trial, defendants appeal. Reversed. Edward W. S. Johnston, for appellants. Walter S. VOLK V. NEW YORK CENT, & H. R. R. Logan, for respondents.

CO. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, PER CURIAM. For the reasons stated in Fourth Department. May 24, 1904.) Action by the opinions in the case of Tracy v. Frey John Volk against the New York Central & (herewith handed down) 88 N. Y. Supp. 874, Hudson River Railroad Company. No opinion.

« 이전계속 »