페이지 이미지


show that his bookkeeper had authority to sign

the check.--Schoor v. Doctor (Sup.) 130. Disclosure of privileged communications by

In an action on a check, the question whethwitness, see "Witnesses," $ 2.

er it was given by reason of fraudulent repreRelease of liability for support of, see "Re-sentation held to be a question for the jury. lease," $ 2.

Kobro v. Schlomowitz (Sup.) 156. Ži. Illegitimacy in general.

Evidence held to prove consideration for a Where defendant asserted title to certain land note given by deceased to plaintiff.-Dunk v. as the sole heir of a daughter, the evidence to Dunk (Sup.) 419. Establish the daughter's illegitimacy held insufficient to overcome the proof establishing, mar

BIRTH. riage of the parents and the birth of the daughter in lawful wedlock.—Tracy v. Frey (Sup.) Laws relating to notice of, see “Health,” g 1. 874. & 2. Property.

BODY EXECUTION. Where illegitimate child dies intestate, leaving only illegitimate sister of the full blood: See “Execution,” $ 2. the latter held to take, under Code Civ. Proc. $ 2732, subd. 9.-In re Lutz's Estate (Sur.) 556.

BONA FIDE PURCHASERS. BENEFICIAL ASSOCIATIONS. Of lands, see “Vendor and Purchaser," $ 3. Building or loan associations, see "Building and Loan Associations."

BONDS. A member of a beneficial society cannot be Corporate bonds, see “Corporations," $ 6. deprived of the benefits of his contract by an Municipal bonds, see "Municipal Corporations," amendment of the by-laws made without his

5. consent.--Zinna v. Saveria Friscia Soc. (Sup.) Sureties on bonds, see “Principal and Surety." 404.

Bonds for performance of duties of trust or BEQUESTS.

office. See "Wills."

See “Assignments for Benefit of Creditors," BETTING.

$ 1.

Bonds in legal proceedings. See “Gaming."

See "Appeal," § 11; “Bail”; “Costs," $ 2.

See "Pleading," 6.
Review of discretion of court in ordering, see

§ 1. Description. “Appeal," $ 5.

A conveyance should be construed in reference to visible locative calls, marked or appear

ing on the lands, in preference to quantity, BILLS AND NOTES.

course, or distance.-People v. Hall (Sup.) 276. Alteration, see “Alteration of Instruments."

The words "east half” and “west half,” in a Usurious interest, see “Usury," $ 1.

description of land conveyed, held not to import

an equal division of the lands described.-Peo§ 1. Requisites and validity.

ple v. Hall (Sup.) 276. In an action on a note between the original parties, the defense of want of consideration is 8 2. Evidence, ascertainment, and open to the maker.-Batterman v. Butcher

tablishment. (Sup.) 685.

Where a practical location of boundaries has

been acquiesced in for a number of years, it $ 2. Negotiability and transfer.

will not be disturbed.-People v. Hall (Sup.) Title to a check payable to a specified person 276. passed by delivery without indorsement.-Meuer v. Phønix Nat. Bank (Sup.) 83.

BREACH. $ 3. Rights and liabilities on indorse- Of condition, see "Insurance," $ 2. ment or transfer.

Of contract, see “Contracts," 8 4; “Sales," $ 3; The transfer of a check by the payee by “Vendor and Purchaser," $ 2. delivery without indorsement destroys its nego- of warranty, see "Insurance,” $ 2; “Sales," tiability, and the transferee takes merely his 88 4, 6. transferror's title, subject to any equities between him and the drawer.-Meuer v. Phænix

BROKERS. Nat. Bank (Sup.) 83. § 4. Actions.

See "Factors”; “Principal and Agent." In an action on a check alleged by defendant Assignment of broker's commissions, see “Asto be a forgery, evidence held insufficient to signments," $ 1.


and 122 New York State Reporter 11. Duties and liabilities to principal. Certificate issued to shareholder of building

A broker held not authorized to sell stocks on and loan association held to be an express coothe customer's account without first seeing tract that such shareholder should at the end whether the customer had already sold through of seven years in any event be entitled to the broker's agent, and, having done so, the withdraw full sum of $100 per share.-People sale was for the broker's account.-Evans v. v. New York Yat. Building & Loan Ass'a (Sup.) Wrenn (Sup.) 617.

850; In re Clark, Id. A broker's agent having been authorized to sell 500 shares for the broker's customer, and

BUILDING CONTRACTS. having sold them in 100-share lots, and bought one of them for himself, held, that the sale was See “Contracts," $ 2. void only as to such 100 shares.-Evans v. Wrenn (Sup.) 617.

BURDEN OF PROOF. § 2. Compensation and lien.

Facts held to show that a broker employed In civil actions, see "Evidence,” { 2 to bring about a sale of real estate had performed his part of the contract.-Putter v. Berger (Sup.) 462.

BY-LAWS. Where a broker was instructed to get an offer for property, which he did, he was not pre- of mutual benefit insurance association, see cluded from recovering commissions by the

"Insurance," $ 4. fact that the price at which the property was sold to his customer was less than the price

CALENDARS. for which he had been instructed to sell the property.-Martin v. Fegan (Sup.) 472.

Of causes for trial, see “Trial," $ 2. $ 3. Actions for compensation. In an action by a broker to recover a balance

CANALS. alleged to be due for commissions in securing a building contract for defendants, evidence held 1 1. Establishment, construction, and insufficient to support a finding that the agreed

maintenance. compensation was $650, instead of $150), as

On the issue of the liability of the state contended by defendant.-Cuperman v. Stern for injuries sustained to a landowner by a (Sup.) 147.

flood, caused by a dam formed at an aqueduct In an action for broker's commissions, evi- for a canal, evidence held to authorize e re dence held to warrant a finding that plaintiff covery for the damages sustained.-Greeley was the procuring cause of the sale.-Martin v. v. State (Sup.) 468. Fegan (Sup.) 472.

Laws 1894, p. 629, c. 338. $ 37, keld to In an action for broker's services, defendant render the state liable for failing to proride held not entitled to the dismissal of the com- openings in an aqueduct for a canal across plaint, on the ground that the proof substan- a stream of sufficient capacity to meet ordinary tiated an action for fraud, and not an action conditions and extraordinary exigencies.-Grer on contract as alleged.-Martin v. Fegan (Sup.) ley v. State (Sup.) 468. 472.

In an action for services in contesting a mu: CANCELLATION OF INSTRUMENTS. nicipal assessment, evidence held insufficient to support a referee's finding that defendant See “Quieting Title"; “Reformation of Inagreed to pay plaintiff's assignor a percentage struments." on the entire assessment, if the property was Cancellation of corporate contract, see “Cor sold before the assessment was finally confirmed.-Wolfsohn v. Haven (Sup.) 475.

porations,” $ 4.

$1. Proceedings and relief. $ 4. Rights, powers, and liabilities as to In a suit to set aside an alleged fraudnlent third persons.

assignment of a bond and mortgage, an allega Owner of a building held liable for injuries tion in the complaint with reference to ibe sustained by a customer of the owner's bro- publication of such assignment held irrelevant. kers while examining the building, and due to --Day v. Day (Sup.) 504. the negligence of the brokers.--Boyd v. United States Jortgage & Trust Co. (Sup.) 289.

Where respondents held certain securities subject to a lien for money advanced, on title be

ing reinvested in testatrix's executors by vacaBUILDING AND LOAN ASSOCIATIONS. tion of a conveyance thereof to another for

fraud, the executors were only entitled to a A borrowing member of a building and loan judgment for a return of such securities on parassociation held not entitled to have payments

ment of the lien.-Ingersoll 5. Cunningham of premium, fees, and dues credited as pay.

(Sup.) 711. ments on his loan, in determining the amount Where respondents held a lien on certain sa due on his mortgage to the association after it curities sought to be recovered in a suit to set had been placed in the hands of a receiver for aside a conveyance thereof, the suit being in dissolution.-Roberts v. Cronk (Sup.) 103. equity, the amount of their lien and the entire

[ocr errors]

13; 01, Shipping."


[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

01 aces

1 1. Establieben incy of evidence in action for personal

& -Brown v. Weir (Sup.) 479. = IKPÁR erg v. Bumford (Sup.) 940.

poras) Tot been delivered down to July 10th, did the car.-Zvonik v. Interurban St. Ry. Co.

1 1. Proceedinn vare, L. & W. R. Co. (Sup.) 961. wied, Where to N. H. & H. R. Co. (Sup.) 971.

Sea Tort stase Repere
Reipal! Cerebrn srersy should be decided in one action.-182. Carriage of live stook.
lungs an inde ll v. Cunningham (Sup.) 711.

A carrier neid not liable for damages caused tiffs, in an action to recover certain by the running away of a horse while in its

*eld by respondents, subject to a lien for custody: „Kaplan v. Midland R. Terminal Co. 2926 . Vil jount due, held not entitled to costs. - | $ 3. Carriage of passengers.

ements, not having alleged à tender of (Sup.) 945. T, L'Il y. Cunningham (Sup.) 711.

Where a passenger's ticket has been taken

from him and not returned, he may buy another BULE:

ticket, and sue the carrier for its price.-StewCANDIDATES.

art v. Baltimore & 0. R. Co. (Sup.) 377. das see "Ca't.

Passenger, whose ticket had been taken away ice, see "Elections," $ 1.

from him and not returned, held not entitled

to any damage for delay, except the price of his CAPITAL.

ticket.-Stewart v. Baltimore & O. R. Co. (Sup.)

377. d'la CT * porations in general, see "Corporations,” $ 4. Personal injuries.

Whether a street railroad company maintain

ed the street, at a point where there was a disCARGO.

used frog in the track, in a reasonably safe condition, held a question for the jury.-Free

land v. Brooklyn Heights R. Co. (Sup.) 264. CARRIERS.

Street railroad company held liable to a pas

senger, injured in a collision between the car iment of right of action against, see and a truck on track, where company failed to signments," $ 1.

maintain track in reasonably safe condition.ge of passengers by vessels, see “Ship-Freeland v. Brooklyn Heights R. Co. (Sup.) ," $ 1.

264. nptions as to notification of consignee In an action by a passenger against a street rrival of goods, see "Evidence," $ 1. railway company, evidence that another person

was injured in the same way as plaintiff, when ries, see "Evidence," $ 3.

alighting from the car at the same place, held Carriage of goods.

admissible.--Holzhauser v. Brooklyn Heights Siera, fue ain damages held not recoverable for R. Co. (Sup.) 269. 23ful delay of express company to deliver A street railway is not a guarantor of the

safety of its passengers, but is required only to ere a carrier for hire undertook to transport exercise requisite care, and is not liable for an ity, which was unbroken when delivered unanticipated assault by one passenger on an

carrier and broken when delivered by the other: --Stutsky v. Brooklyn Heights R. Co.
r, the burden was on the carrier to show (Sup.) 338.
che injury was not due to negligence. A passenger cannot recover for injuries sus-

tained in alighting from a street car, by reain action against a carrier for failure to

son of the car starting forward after having r or to return goods, a general denial put stopped, in the absence of any notice to the conue both the delivery of the goods to de- ductor of the passenger's intention to alight. nt and their nondelivery by it-Brooks v. McCarthy v. Interurban St. Ry. Co. (Sup.) 388. rare, L. & W. R. Co. (Sup.) 961.

The rule that a motorman and conductor, enan action against a carrier for failure to gaged in the operation of a car, are held only r goods to a consignee in Denver, evi- to reasonable care, applies as tó teams on the that the were July 2d, in how an unreasonable delay. - Brooks v. (Sup.) 399.

Evidence held sufficient to go to the jury on an issue as to the alleged wrongful de- the question of negligence in starting a street

of goods by a carrier without produc- car, whereby a passenger was thrown down.of a bill of lading, evidence that plaintiff's Harty v. New York & Q. C. Ry. Co. (Sup.) jor had acquiesced in such a course of 422. ig held admissible.-Bernstein v. New

In an action against a street railway com

pany for personal injuries, amendment of pleadan action against a carrier for failure to ings to conform to the proof held proper, unr goods within a reasonable time, the der. Code Civ. Proc. $ 723.-Dorff v. Brooklyn are of damages stated.-G. S. Roth Cloth Heights R. Co. (Sup.) 463. 10. v. Maine S. S. Co. (Sup.) 987.

In an action against a street railway comwell-known local custom that a carrier pany for injuries to a passenger, evidence held pods shall notify the consignee by mail

to justify an inference of negligence.-Dorff a part of the agreement of transportation.

v. Brooklyn Heights R. Co. (Sup.) 463. S. Roth Clothing Co. v. Maine S. S. Co. A street railroad company is not liable for .) 987.

injuries to a passenger caused by the premature


[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]


[ocr errors]

s as to la

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]


[ocr errors]

1 loan

180p.) 171.

[ocr errors]

for is de am230 Vezuity

, the

and 122 New York State Reporter starting of the car in consequence of a signal Question of sufficiency of notice posted given to the motorman by another passenger. railroad company, under statute permitting it McDonough v. Third Avenue R. Co. (Sup.) 609. to so limit its liability for loss of passend's In an action against a street railroad for in- baggage, held properly submitted to the juria

Williams v. Central R. Co. of New Jersey juries to passenger, evidence held insufficient to support a verdict for plaintiff.—Mullarkey V. (Sup.) 434. Interurban St. Ry. Co. (Sup.) 699.

Law of New Jersey held to apply to loss at In an action against a street railroad for station of departure of trunk of passes death of plaintiff's decedent from the negli- going from New York to New Jersey.-12gence of the street railroad, evidence held liams v. Central R. Co. of New Jersey (Si

434. insufficient to support a verdict for plaintiff.Fremont 5. Metropolitan St. Ry. Co. (Sup.) Relation of railroad company to passenger's 752.

trunk, stolen from station of departure biote In an action against a railroad company for checking, held that of common carrier, and a personal injuries occasioned by plaintiff stumb- warehouseman.-Williams v. Central R. C. ling over a ticket chopping box which had of New Jersey (Sup.) 434. been broken from its fastenings by a mob, Statute permitting railroad companies to lindefendant held guilty of no negligence.-Wagner it liability for loss of passenger's baggage to v. Brooklyn Heights R. Co. (Sup.) 791. posting general notice held not to apply to lies

Fact that a street car stopped with a jerk of baggage by theft at station of departura. held insufficient to show negligence, in the ab

-Williams v. Central R. Co. of New Jerses sence of any showing that the jerk was unusual. (Sup.) 434. -Johnson v. Interurban St. Ry. Co. (Sup.) 866. In action against sleeping car company for the Verdict for plaintiff, in an action against a

value of baggage supposed to have been stolen, carrier for personal injuries, held not sustain evidence held sufficient to take the question of able.-Chiavarelli v. New York Cent. & H. R. defendant's negligence to the jury.-Arthur v. R. Co. (Sup.) 869.

Pullman Co. (Sup.) 981. In an action for injuries sutained by a passenger on a street car, an instruction held er

CASE ON APPEAL. roneous, as making defendant an insurer after plaintiff got on the car and until he had actual- Making and settlement, see "Appeal," $ 3. ly taken his seat.-Shadletsky V. New York City Ry. Co. (Sup.) 1014.

CAUSE OF ACTION. In an action against a street railroad company for injuries sustained by a passenger, it was See “Action." prejudicial error to strike out the evidence of defendant to the effect that it had no record of the accident.-Shadletsky y, New York City

CAVEAT EMPTOR. Ry. Co. (Sup.) 1014.

See "Sales," $ 4. 85. Contributory negligence of

person injured. Judgment for plaintiff for injuries sustained

CERTIFICATE. while alighting from a street car held against the weight of the evidence.--Maloney v. Metro- Liquor tax certificate, see "Intoxicating Liq. politan St. Ry, Co. (Sup.) 638.

uors," $ 2. In an action against a street railway compa

Of building and loan association, see "Baild. ny for injuries to a passenger alighting from a

ing and Loan Associations." car, evidence held to show plaintiff guilty of con. tributory negligence.—Pearl v. Interurban St.

CERTIORARI. Ry. Co. (Sup.) 915.

Where, in an action for personal injuries re- To review tax assessments, see "Taxation," $ 2. ceived while alighting from defendant's street car, the weight of the testimony is to the effect that the injuries were received by stepping CHAMPERTY AND MAINTENANCE. off the car before it stopped, judgment for plaintiff should not be permitted to stand.-Lynch v. Under Code Civ. Proc. $ 74, agreement for Interurban St. Ry. Co. (Sup.) 935.

compensation of attorney held champertous and In an action by a passenger for injuries, hela, incapable of enforcement.-Taylor v. Enthoren that he was not guilty of contributory negli

(Sup.) 138. gence.-Sh dletsky v. New York City Ry. Co. Under Code Civ. Proc. $ 73, an attorney can(Sup.) 1014.

not maintain an action on a claim assigned to $ 6. Passengers' effects.

him for the purpose of bringing an action iu

the county.-Sugarman v. Mandolla (Sup.) 313. A connecting carrier held not liable for loss of a trunk delivered to an initial carrier, in the absence of any evidence to show that the

CHANGE OF VENUE. trunk was ever receired by the connecting carrier.-Romero v. McKernan (Sup.) 305.

Of civil actions, see "Venue," & 2

e Tart Sulge!
...' 07

y in civil actions, see “Trial," $ 8. Against estate of decedent, see “Executors and

Administrators," $ 4.

'iptions in aid of, see "Subscriptions."

See "Quieting Title."

ate charter, see "Corporations," $ 2.

Marriage by, see “Marriage."
Construction and operation.

cital in a mortgage on fixtures held suffi-
to put the mortgagee on inquiry as to a Parol evidence, see “Evidence," $ 8.
ion relative to the fixtures contained in a
.ct between the mortgagor and his vendor,
och v. Lapham (Sup.) 222.


ere plaintiffs, prior to receiving a chattel on public improvement proceedings, see “Muage under which they claimed, knew of a

" $
mortgage to C., its assignment to N., and
it was unpaid, a judgment finding such
age prior to plaintiff's mortgage hell COLLATERAL INHERITANCE TAXES.

-Salmon v. Norris (Sup.) 780.
U. R.

See “Taxation," $ 3.
in action to foreclose a mortgage, a find-
Ce bat the property, in defendant's posses COLLATERAL UNDERTAKING.

sas covered by the mortgage held not sus-
1.-Lembeck & Betz Eagle Brewing Co. v.

See "Frauds, Statute of," § 1; “Guaranty."
í (Sup.) 1068.

False Pretenses"; "Fraud."

By bank, see “Banks and Banking," § 1.
Of estate of decedent, see "Executors and Ad.

ministrators," $ 3.
Bills and Notes."

sit of, see “Banks and Banking," $ 1.
nent by, see “Payment," $ 1.

Carriage of goods and passengers, see "Car

riers”; “Shipping." CHILD.

8 1. Means and methods of regulation.

Express business of a domestic railroad comBastards"; "Infants."

pany, originating in New York for shipment beyond the state, and shipments from outside

the state for delivery within the state, held CHOSE IN ACTION.

interstate commerce, and not taxable against

such railroad corporation under Tax Law, Laws zoment, see “Assignments."

1896, p. 857, c. 908, § 184.-People v. Miller

(Sup.) 373.


To take testimony, see “Depositions."
"Municipal Corporations."


See "Factors."
"Municipal Corporations,” g 1.


Of brokers, see “Brokers," $ 2.

Of executor or administrators, see "Executors “Replevin."

and Administrators,'' $ 7.

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


[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small][merged small]
« 이전계속 »