Slike stranica
PDF
ePub
[ocr errors]

and the making of the mortgage sought to be foreclosed in this action. A. C. Wade, of Jamestown, and John L. Hurlbert, of Dunkirk, for appellants. Thomas H. Larkins, of Dunkirk, for respondents.

PER CURIAM. Judgments of Appellate Division and Special Term modified, so as to require the plaintiffs to repay to the defendant Loren J. Lamphere, receiver, only the sum of $7,500, as of the date of the judgment of the Special Term, less the amount due on the bond and mortgage executed by the defendant corporation to Reuben W. Wright for the sum of $2,000, and interest; and in case the plaintiffs fail to make such payment the said receiver may have execution therefor and the defendant Reuben W. Wright may enforce his mortgage as a lien on the premises by a foreclosure thereof; and, as so modified, judgments affirmed, without costs in this court to either party. CULLEN, C. J., and GRAY, WERNER, HISCOCK, COLLIN, CUDDEBACK, and MILLER, JJ., concur.

FINNEY, Appellant, v. NATIONAL FIREPROOFING CO., Respondent. (Court of Appeals of New York. May 23, 1913.) Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department (153 App. Div. 1, 138 N. Y. Supp. 73), entered December 16, 1912, reversing a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict and granting a new trial in an action to recover for the death of plaintiff's intestate alleged to have been occasioned through the negligence of defendant, his employer. Alfred S. Brown, of New York City, for appellant. Edwin A. Jones, of New York City, and H. A. Linea weaver, of Pittsburgh, Pa., for respondent. PER CURIAM. Order affirmed, and judgment absolute ordered against appellant on the stipulation, with costs in all courts.

[blocks in formation]

Respondent. (Court of Appeals of New York. FRONCKOWIAK, Appellant, v. PLATEK, June 13, 1913.) Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Fourth Judicial Department (153 App. Div. 938, 138 N. Y. Supp. 1116), entered December 4, 1912, affirming a judgment in favor of defendant' entered upon the report of a referee appointed pursuant to section 2718 of the Code of Civil Procedure to determine a rejected claim against the estate of defendant's intestate. John T. Ryan, of Buffalo, for appellant. George E. Pierce, of Buffalo, for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with

costs.

CULLEN, C. J., and GRAY, WILLARD BARTLETT, CHASE, CUDDEBACK, HOGAN, and MILLER, JJ., concur.

GATES, Appellant, v. BUFFALO, R. & P. RY. CO., Respondent. (Court of Appeals of New York. June 17, 1913.) Appeal from a judgment, entered October 25, 1912, upon an neg-order order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Fourth Judicial Department (152 App. Div. 954, 137 N. Y. Supp. 1121), overrulin the first instance by the Appellate Division, ing plaintiff's exceptions, ordered to be heard denying a motion for a new trial and directing judgment for defendant upon the nonsuit grant

CULLEN, C. J., and WERNER, WILLARD BARTLETT, HISCOCK, CHASE, COLLIN, and HOGAN, JJ., concur.

FOX et al., Appellants, v. PEACOCK et al., Respondents. (Court of Appeals of New York. June 10, 1913.) Motion to dismiss an appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department (141 N. Y. Supp. 1119), entered May 21, 1913, affirming a judgment in favor of defendants entered upon the report of a referee in an action to recover for loss of profits alleged to have been occasioned by the defendants' failure to perform its contract. The motion was made upon the grounds that the Appellate Division had unanimously decided that the findings of fact were supported by the evidence, that the exceptions were frivolous, and that no question of law was presented that the Court of Appeals had jurisdiction to review. William P. Langevin, of New York City, for the motion. William C. Rosenberg, of New York City, opposed.

PER CURIAM. Motion granted and appeal dismissed, without costs.

STANDARD

FRASCONE, Respondent, v. OIL CO., Appellant, et al. (Court of Appeals of New York. June 3, 1913.) Appeal by permission, from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department (153 App. Div. 199, 138 N. Y. Supp. 370), entered December 2, 1912, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict in an action to recover for the death of plaintiff's intestate alleged to have been_occasioned through the negligent operation of an automobile by an employé of defendant. Dean Emery, Vine H. Smith, Robert S. Sloan, and

ed at the Trial Term in an action to recover for the death of plaintiff's intestate, alleged to have been occasioned through the negligence of defendant. Frank T. Miller, of Syracuse, for appellant. Samuel M. Havens and James S. Havens, both of Rochester, for respondent. PER CURIAM.

costs.

Judgment affirmed, with

CULLEN, C. J., and GRAY, CHASE, CUDDEBACK, HOGAN, and MILLER, JJ., conWILLARD BARTLETT, J., not voting. cur.

GROSS, Appellant, v. TITLE GUARANTEE & TRUST CO., Respondent. (Court of Appeals of New York. May 6, 1913.) Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department (146 App. Div. 956, 131 N. Y. Supp. 1118), entered December 4, 1911, affirming a judgment in favor of defendant entered upon a dismissal of the complaint by the court at a Trial Term without a jury in an action to recover damages alleged to have been occasioned plaintiff's assignor through the defendant's errors and omiscertain real property. Edward W. S. Johnston sions in making a search as to the title of and Benjamin E. Messler, both of New York City, for appellant. Harold Swain and Robert W. Cromley, both of New York City, for respondent. Judgment affirmed, with

PER CURIAM.

costs.
CULLEN, C. J., and GRAY, WILLARD
BARTLETT, CHASE, CUDDEBACK, HO-
GAN, and MILLER, JJ., concur.

HAMMERSTAD, Respondent, v. NORWEGIAN NEWS CO., Appellant. (Court of Appeals of New York. April 29, 1913.) Motion to dismiss an appeal from a judgment of the

Second Judicial Department (153 App. Div. 910, 137 N. Y. Supp. 1122), entered December 3, 1912, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict in an action to recover for services and for money loaned. The motion was made upon the grounds that the Court of Appeals had no jurisdiction to entertain the appeal, that the Appellate Division had unanimously decided that the verdict was supported by the evidence, that the exceptions were frivolous and that no questions of law were presented for review. Martin H. Latner, of Brooklyn, for the motion. David C. Bennett, Jr., of New York City, opposed.

PER CURIAM. Motion granted, and appeal dismissed, with costs and $10 costs of motion.

HARRIMAN, Respondent, v. FRANCIS H. LEGGETT & CO., Appellant. (Court of Ap peals of New York. June 10, 1913.) Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department (149 App. Div. 944, 134 N. Y. Supp. 1134), entered March 29, 1912, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict in an action to recover for personal injuries alleged to have been sustained by plaintiff through the negligence of defendant, his employer. Theodore H. Lord and Lyman A. Spalding, both of New York City, for appellant. Sydney A. Syme, of Mt. Vernon, for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with costs.

CULLEN, C. J., and GRAY, WILLARD BARTLETT, CHASE, CUDDEBACK, and HOGAN, JJ., concur. MILLER, J., not sitting.

In re HASBROUCK. (Court of Appeals of New York. April 29, 1913.) Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department (153 App. Div. 394, 138 N. Y. Supp. 620), entered November 30, 1912, which reversed so much of a decree of the Queens County Surrogate's Court as adjudged that the appellants herein have a lien upon the interest of the respondent in certain stock being a part of the estate of Benjamin F. Curtis, deceased. William D. Sporborg, of New York City, for appellants. Alexander Thain, of New York City, for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Appeal dismissed, with costs. CULLEN, C. J., and WERNER, HISCOCK, COLLIN, CUDDEBACK and MILLER, JJ., concur. GRAY, J., absent.

HAYES, Appellant, v. HAYES, Respondent. (Court of Appeals of New York. May 6, 1913.) Appeal, by permission, from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department (150 App. Div. 842, 135 N. Y. Supp. 225), entered May 1, 1912, which reversed an order of Special Term adjudging the defendant in contempt of court for failure to pay alimony which had accrued during the pendency of an action for divorce, the complaint in which had been dismissed. The following question was certified: "Did the dismissal of the complaint deprive the court of jurisdiction to punish the defendant for contempt, for disobeying an order awarding alimony during the pendency of the action, by failing to pay the same?" Leo R. Brilles, of New York City, for appellant. John F. Harrington, of New York City, for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Order affirmed, without costs, on authority of Matter of Thrall, 12 App. Div. 235, 42 N. Y. Supp. 439, affirmed on opinion below 153 N. Y. 644, 47 N. E. 1111. Question certified answered in the affirmative.

CULLEN, C. J., and GRAY, WERNER, HISCOCK, COLLIN, CUDDEBACK, and

HESSEN, Appellant, v. McKINLEY, Respondent. (Court of Appeals of New York. June 20, 1913.) Appeal, by permission, from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department (155 App. Div. 496, 140 N. Y. Supp. 724), entered March 7, 1913, which reversed an interlocutory judgment of Special Term sustaining a demurrer to the complaint in an action to impress a trust upon a savings bank account. The following question was certified: "Does the complaint state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action?" Michael J. Joyce and Almeth W. Hoff, both of New York City, for appellant. Clarence K. McGuire and Raymond Reubenstein, both of New York City, for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Order affirmed, with costs. Question certified answered in the negative. CULLEN, C. J., and GRAY, HISCOCK, CHASE, HOGAN, and MILLER, JJ., concur. WILLARD BARTLETT, J., dissents.

HURLBERT v. HALLOCK et al. (Court of Appeals of New York. June 3, 1913.) Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Fourth Judicial Department (148 App. Div. 378, 132 N. Y. Supp. 842), entered January 6, 1912, which affirmed a judgment of Special Term construing the will of David Wright, deceased. Elton D. Warner, of Dunkirk, and John J. Lentz of Columbus, Ohio, for appellants. John L. Hurlbert, of Dunkirk, for respondent Hurlbert. James L. Weeks, of Jamestown, for respondents Colgan and oth ers.

PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with costs to all parties payable out of the estate. CULLEN, C. J., and GRAY, WILLARD BARTLETT, CHASE, CUDDEBACK, HOGAN, and MILLER, JJ., concur.

JAFFE et al., Appellants, v. WELD et al., Respondents. (Court of Appeals of New York. April 29, 1913.) Appeal, by permission, from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department (155 App. Div. 110, 139 N. Y. Supp. 1101), entered February 7, 1913, which affirmed an order of Special Term denying plaintiffs' motion for judgment on the pleadings and sustaining demurrers to the complaint in an action to impress a trust upon certain merchandise. The following question was certified: "Does the complaint state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action?" George T. Hogg and Antonio Knauth, both of New York City, for appellants. Edward H. Blanc, Edward R. Greene, and Rudolph L. Von Bernuth, all of New York City, for respondents.

PER CURIAM. Order affirmed, with costs, and question certified answered in the negative. There can be no doubt of the rule that funds obtained by fraud may be followed through however many transmutations of form they may have passed so long as the rights of a third party for value and in good faith do not intervene; but this complaint, though prolix to a degree not easy to characterize, is so replete with hypothetical and alternative allegations that it is not possible on any reasonable interpretation to spell out any direct allegation that the money obtained from these plaintiffs did in fact pass into the cotton upon which it is sought to im

press a trust.

CULLEN, C. J., and GRAY, WERNER, HISCOCK, COLLIN, and CUDDEBACK, JJ., concur. MILLER, J., takes no part.

In re KEEFE'S WILL. (Court of Appeals of New York. June 20, 1913.) Appeal from an

preme Court in the First Judicial Department (155 App. Div. 575, 141 N. Y. Supp. 5), entered March 20, 1913, which reversed a decree of the New York County Surrogate's Court admitting to probate an instrument propounded as the last will of Matthew J. Keefe, deceased. Charles B. McLaughlin and Maurice B. Rich, both of New York City, for appellant. Edward W. Drucker and Stephen H. Keating, both of New York City, for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Order affirmed, with costs. CULLEN, C. J., and GRAY, WILLARD BARTLETT, HISCOCK, CHASE, HOGAN, and MILLER, JJ., concur.

KETCHAM, Respondent, v. SAMMIS, Appellant, et al. (Court of Appeals of New York. June 17, 1913.) Motion to dismiss an appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department (155 App. Div. 920, 140 N. Y. Supp. 1126), entered March 15, 1913, affirming a judgment in favor of respondents herein entered upon a decision of the court on trial at Special Term in an action to foreclose a mortgage. The motion was made upon the grounds that the appeal was from an unanimous decision, was unauthorized and presented no question of law for review. Thomas Young, of Huntington, for the motion. Edgar B. Bronson, Jr., of New York City, opposed.

[blocks in formation]

KNICKERBOCKER TRUST CO. v. ONEONTA, C. & R. S. RY. CO. et al. (Court of Appeals of New York. April 29, 1913.) Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Third Judicial Department (154 App. Div. 908, 139 N. Y. Supp. 885), entered January 7, 1913, which affirmed an order of Special Term directing the referee in foreclosure proceedings to pay a franchise tax assessed against the Oneonta and Mohawk Valley Railroad Company. Ralph W. Gwinn and Louis F. Reed, both of New York City, for appellants. Thomas Carmody, Atty. Gen. (Wilber W. Chambers of New York City, of counsel), for respond

ent.

PER CURIAM. Order affirmed, with costs. CULLEN, C. J., and GRAY, WERNER, HISCOCK, COLLIN, CUDDEBACK, and MILLER, JJ., concur.

LAARSON, Respondent, v. CAMERON, Appellant. (Court of Appeals of New York. May 23, 1913.) Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department (149 App. Div. 952, 133 N. Y. Supp. 1129), entered March 4, 1912, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict in an action to recover for the death of plaintiff's intestate alleged to have been occasioned by the negligence of defendant, his employer. E. Clyde Sherwood and Amos H. Stephens, both of New York City, for appellant. Thomas J. O'Neill and L. F. Fish, both of New York City, for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with

costs.

CULLEN, C. J., and WERNER, WILLARD BARTLETT, HISCOCK, CHASE, COLLIN, and HOGAN, JJ., concur.

LEASK et al., Respondents, v. MCCARTY, Appellant. (Court of Appeals of New York. June 3, 1913.) Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department (147 App. Div. 796, 132 N. Y. Supp. 92), entered December 14, 1911, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiffs en

tered upon a decision of the court on trial at Special Term in an action to determine the title to the sum of $6,962.50, which the plaintiffs had deducted and retained from the defendant's share of the residuary estate of Hudson Hoagland, deceased, it being claimed by them that she was indebted to the estate in that amount for principal and interest, by reason of five certain instruments signed by her in the form of promissory notes. James Gillin, of New York City, for appellant. J. Hampden Dougherty, of New York City, for respondents.

PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with costs.

CULLEN, C. J., and GRAY, WILLARD BARTLETT, CHASE, CUDDEBACK, and HOGAN, JJ., concur. MILLER, J., not sitting.

LEASK et al., Respondents, v. MCCARTY, Appellant. (Court of Appeals of New York. June 20, 1913.)

PER CURIAM. Motion for reargument denied, with $10 costs. See 208 N. Y. 635, 102 N. E. 1105.

FAIRCHILD et al., Appellants. LONG ISLAND R. CO., Respondent, v. (Court of Appeals of New York. May 6, 1913.) Appeal, by permission, from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department (152 App. Div. 723, 137 N. Y. Supp. 563), entered October 4, 1912, affirmed a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a decision of the court on trial at Special Term in a proceeding to condemn land for railroad purposes. The following questions were certified: "(1) Was the plaintiff at the time of the commencement of these proceedings bound by the provisions of the deed recited in the petition herein between the habendum clause thereof and the succeeding covenant by the grantors against incumbrances? (2) Were these appellants entitled to enforce these provisions? (3) Do these provisions create interests in parcel No. 2 which may be acquired by the plaintiff in this proceeding? (4) Will those provisions be extinguished by such acquisition? (5) Does the deed of 1864 set forth in the petition by the legal construction of its language purport to provide such a condition against the subsequent appropriation to public use which is contemplated in this proceeding as that, upon breach of such condition, the grantors or their heirs might re-enter? (6) Would such a condition be valid? (7) If the heirs of of the present appropriation, can the devisees the grantors can enforce this condition because of the grantors also have compensation because of such appropriation? (8) Is the measure of compensation to which these appellants are enTerm in the seventh conclusion of law?" Edtitled correctly stated by the court at Special ward E. Sprague, of New York City, for appellants. James W. Treadwell, Joseph F. Keany, and Louis J. Carruthers, all of New York City, for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Order affirmed, with costs, on opinion of Thomas, J., below. Third, fourth, and eighth questions certified answered in the affirmative. Remaining questions not answered.

CULLEN, C. J., and GRAY, WERNER, COLLIN, CUDDEBACK, and MILLER, JJ., concur. HISCOCK, J., absent.

LUBER, Appellant, v. CONNORS, Respondent. (Court of Appeals of New York. May 20, 1913.) Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Fourth Judicial Department (152 App. Div. 897. 136 N. Y. Supp. 351), entered August 23, 1912, affirming a judgment in favor of defendant entered upon a dismissal of the complaint

[blocks in formation]

LYELL AVENUE LUMBER CO., Respondent, v. LIGHTHOUSE et al., Appellants. (Court of Appeals of New York. June 3, 1913.) Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Fourth Judicial Department (151 App. Div. 902, 135 N. Y. Supp. 1124), entered June 4, 1912, affirming a final judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a decision of the court at Special Term in an action against stockholders of a corporation to recover an amount remaining unpaid on their stock subscriptions and apply the same to the payment of creditors of such corporation. Sardius D. Bentley, of Rochester, for appellants. Nicholas J. Weldgen, of Rochester, for respondent.

PER CURIAM. costs.

Judgment affirmed, with

CULLEN, C. J., and WILLARD BARTLETT, CHASE, CUDDEBACK, HOGAN, and MILLER, JJ., concur. GRAY, J., absent.

MCCOY et al. v. GAS ENGINE & POWER CO. et al. (Court of Appeals of New York. June 3, 1913.) Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department (152 App. Div. 642, 137 N. Y. Supp. 591), entered November 19, 1912, modifying and affirming as modified a judgment of Special Term declaring illegal, as violating section 74 of the Code of Civil Procedure, a contract between attorney and client for legal services and fixing the amount of the attorney's lien. Benjamin Trapnell, of New York City, for appellant. John F. Brennan, of Yonkers, and John J. Crennan, of New Rochelle, for respondent Charles L. Seabury & Co., Consolidated.

PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with

costs.

CULLEN, C. J., and GRAY, WILLARD BARTLETT, CHASE, CUDDEBACK, and HOGAN, JJ., concur. MILLER, J., not sitting.

MCGINN, Respondent, v. LIGHTHOUSE et al., Appellants. (Court of Appeals of New York. May 20, 1913.) Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Fourth Judicial Department (149 App. Div. 931, 134 N. Y. Supp. 1138), entered March 11, 1912, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon the report of a referee appointed under section 2718 of the Code of Civil Procedure to determine a disputed claim against the estate of John C. Lighthouse, deceased. S. D. Bentley, of Rochester. for appellants. Hugh Satterlee, of Rochester, for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with costs.

CULLEN, C. J., and WERNER, WILLARD BARTLETT, HISCOCK, CHASE, and HOGAN, JJ., concur. COLLIN, J., absent.

MCSWEGAN v. STEPHAN et al. (Court of Appeals of New York. June 17, 1913.)

sion of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department (155 App. Div. 899, 140 N. Y. Supp. 1130), entered March 7, 1913, upon an order affirming an interlocutory judgment of partition and sale entered upon the report of a referee in an action to partition and fix the rights of the various parties in and to certain real property in the city of New York. Woolsey Carmalt, Henry Herrold, and George W. Bristol, all of New York City, for appellants. Richard H. Clarke, of New York City, for respondent McSwegan. Walter S. Newhouse, Eli J. Blair, and Frederick C. Lawyer, all of New York City, for respondents Gilchrist and others. PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with costs.

BARTLETT, HISCOCK, CHASE, HOGAN, CULLEN, C. J., and GRAY, WILLARD and MILLER, JJ., concur.

In re MECHANICS' BANK, BROOKLYN. (Court of Appeals of New York. June 17, 1913.) Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department (156 App. Div. 343, 141 N. Y. Supp. 473), entered April 25, 1913, which reversed an order of Special Term denying a motion for a peremptory writ of mandamus to compel the register of the county of Kings to record a certain deed, and granted said motion. The register had refused to record the deed unless there was presented with it an affidavit showing that it was not intended as a mortgage. Thomas Carmody, Atty. Gen. (Joseph A. Kellogg, of Glens Falls, and Claude T. Dawes, of New York City, of counsel), for apM. Gray, both of Brooklyn, for respondent. pellants. Franklin M. Tomlin and James

PER CURIAM. Order affirmed, with costs. CULLEN, C. J., and GRAY, WILLARD BARTLETT, HISCOCK, CHASE, and MILLER, JJ., concur. HOGAN, J., dissents.

HIRSH & CO., Appellant. (Court of Appeals MIGEL et al., Respondents, v. HELLER, of New York. June 3, 1913.) Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department (151 App. Div. 637, 136 N. Y. Supp. 969), entered July 15, 1912, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiffs entered upon a verdict in an action for money had and received. Nathan D. Stern, of New York City, for appellant. Henry L. Scheuerman and Herbert R. Limburg, both of New York City, for respondents.

PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with costs.

GRAY, WILLARD BARTLETT, CHASE, CUDDEBACK, HOGAN, and MILLER, JJ., concur. CULLEN, C. J., absent.

MONTAGUE v. HOTEL GOTHAM CO. et

al. (Court of Appeals of New York. June 20, 1913.)

PER CURIAM. Motion for reargument denied, with $10 costs. See 208 N. Y. 442, 102 N. E. 513. See, also, 150 App. Div. 902, 134 N. Y. Supp. 1139.

MULLER et al. v. CITY OF PHILADELPHIA et al. (Court of Appeals of New York. May 6, 1913.). Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department (153 App. Div. 898, 138 N. Y. Supp. 1130), entered November 19, 1912, which affirmed an order of Special Term granting a motion to modify a judgment theretofore entered so as to permit the execu

PER CURIAM. Appeal dismissed, with costs.

CULLEN, C. J., and GRAY, WILLARD BARTLETT, HISCOCK, CHASE, HOGAN, and MILLER, JJ., concur.

certain moneys into court with interest at two | for appellant. G. H. Crawford, of New York and one-half per cent. from April 1, 1912, and City, for respondent. releasing them and the defendant Thomas W. Evans Museum and Institute Society upon such payment being made from further liability to parties claiming under Juliette C. Henderson, deceased. See, also, 101 N. E. 1112. J. Noble Hayes, of New York City, for appellant. Lewis H. Tooker and Wolcott G. Lane, both of New York City, for respondents Muller and others. Charles H. Tuttle, of New York City, for respondents Thomas W. Evans Museum & Institute Society and others.

PER CURIAM. Order affirmed, with costs. CULLEN, C. J., and GRAY, WERNER, HISCOCK, COLLIN, and CUDDEBACK, JJ., concur. MILLER, J., not sitting.

MULLER et al. v. CITY OF PHILADELPHIA et al. (Court of Appeals of New York. June 10, 1913.)

PER CURIAM. Motion to amend remittitur denied, with $10 costs. See 208 N. Y. 182, 101 N. E. 762. See, also, 101 N. E. 1112; 102 N. E. 1106; 129 N. Y. Supp. 1037.

MURCOTT et al., Respondents, v. CITY OF NEW YORK, Appellant. (Court of Appeals of New York. May 13, 1913.) Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department (152 App. Div. 911, 137 N. Y. Supp. 1131), entered September 17, 1912, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiffs entered upon the report of a referee in an action to recover alleged damages to plaintiffs' real and personal property caused by water backing up through sewer connections and flowing over the sidewalk into their premises. See, also, 101 N. E. 1112. Archibald R. Watson, Corp. Counsel, of New York City (James D. Bell and Frank Julian Price, both of Brooklyn, of counsel), for appellant. J. Stewart Ross, of Brooklyn, for respondents.

PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with costs.

CULLEN, C. J., and GRAY, WERNER, HISCOCK, COLLIN, CUDDEBACK, and MILLER, JJ., concur.

NEW YORK TELEPHONE CO., Appellant. v. DE NOYELLES BRICK CO. et al., Respondents. (Court of Appeals of New York. June 17, 1913.) Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department (154 App. Div. 845, 139 N. Y. Supp. 748), entered January 24, 1913, which affirmed an order of Special Term confirming the report of commissioners in condemnation proceedings. Alexander Cameron and Charles T. Russell, both of New York City, for appellant. William McCauley, of Haverstraw, for respondents.

PER CURIAM. Order affirmed, with costs. WILLARD BARTLETT. HISCOCK, CHASE, HOGAN, and MILLER, JJ., concur. CULLEN, C. J., and GRAY, J., not sitting.

In re NORTH RIVER STEAMBOAT CO. (Court of Appeals of New York. June 20, 1913.) Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department (154 App. Div. 953, 139 N. Y. Supp. 1135), entered January 10, 1913, which affirmed an order of the Rockland County Court denying a motion to vacate a prior order granting a ferry license to the North River Steamboat Company. Vincent P. Donihee

NUGENT, Appellant, V. BROOKLYN HEIGHTS R. CO., Respondent. (Court of Appeals of New York. June 10, 1913.) Motion to dismiss an appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the 953, 139 N. Y. Supp. 372), entered January 15, Second Judicial Department (154 App. Div. 1913, which affirmed a final judgment in favor of defendant entered upon an order of Special Term sustaining a demurrer to and directing a dismissal of the complaint in an action to recover for the loss of services of an infant by reason of personal injuries alleged to have been sustained through the negligence of defendant. The motion was made upon the grounds that the affirmance by the Appellate Division was unanimous and that permission to appeal had not been obtained. D. A. Marsh and George D. Yeomans, both of Brooklyn, for the motion. William E. Butler, of New York City, opposed. peal dismissed, with costs and $10 costs of moPER CURIAM. Motion granted, and ap

tion.

NUGENT, Appellant, V. BROOKLYN HEIGHTS R. CO., Respondent. (Court of Apto dismiss an appeal from a judgment of the peals of New York. June 10, 1913.) Motion Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department (154 App. Div. 667, 139 N. Y. Supp. 367), entered January 15, 1913, which affirmed a final judgment in favor of defendant entered upon an order of Special Term sustaining a demurrer to and directing a dismissal of the complaint in an action to recover for personal injuries alleged to have been sustained by plaintiff through the negligence of defendant. The motion was made upon the ground that the affirmance by the Appellate Division was unanimous and that permission to appeal had not been obtained. D. A. Marsh and George D. Yeomans, both of Brooklyn, for the motion. William E. Butler, of New York City, opposed.

dismissed, without costs.
PER CURIAM. Motion granted, and appeal

O'CONNELL, Respondent, v. PRESS PUB. CO., Appellant. (Court of Appeals of New York. June 10, 1913.) Motion to dismiss an appeal, by permission, from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department (155 App. Div. 918, 140 N. Y. Supp. 1134), entered February 25, 1913, unanimously affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict in an action for libel. The motion was made upon the ground that the appeal was without merit and taken solely for purpose of delay. Henry Howard Taylor, of New York City, opposed. F. Cochrane, of Brooklyn, for the motion. PER CURIAM. Motion denied, with $10 costs.

ORANGE COUNTY TRUST CO. et al., Respondents, V. MILLER et al., Appellants. (Court of Appeals of New York. May 20, 1913.) Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department (149 App. Div. 292, 133 N. Y. Supp. 800), entered February 8, 1912, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiffs entered upon a decision of the court at a Trial

« PrethodnaNastavi »