6 (N.Y.Sup.) A contract for the sale of a proprietary remedy business held to entitle defendant to use its corporate name, and to compound and sell the remedies transferred to it, but not to use plaintiff's name, so as to duce the public to believe that he was a physician connected with the business.-Kilmer v. Dr. Kilmer & Co., 154 N. Y. S. 977.

GRAND JURY.

by Insanity Law, § 93, and not by Code Civ. Proc. §§ 2039, 2066.-Id.

On application for habeas corpus to determine issue of relator's present sanity or insanity, held, in view of history of case, that the court would grant a motion for a trial of the issue by a jury as advisory to the court.-Id. in-120 (N.Y.Sup.) The disposition of prior writs of habeas corpus, sought to liberate a person, acquitted of murder because of insanity, on the ground that he was then sane, was not res judicata of the issue of petitioner's insanity on subsequent hearing of new writ for similar relief. People ex rel. Thaw v. Grifenhagen, 154 N. Y. S. 965.

26 (N.Y.Co.Ct.) Under Code Cr. Proc. $8 22, 39, 56, held, that a grand jury sitting connection with the Supreme Court was without jurisdiction to indict defendant for assault in the third degree, in the absence of the certificate referred to in section 57.-People v. Roberts, 154 N. Y. S. 1103.

HARMLESS ERROR.

See Appeal, 1033-1064; Criminal Law, 1170-1174.

HEALTH.

See Food; Insurance, 291.

HEARSAY.

See Evidence, 222, 318.
HEIRS.

II. CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION. See Descent and Distribution.

36 (N.Y.Sup.) A bond executed by directors of a corporation, guaranteeing payment of notes of the corporation held to bind them for payment of subsequent renewal notes.-Utica City Nat. Bank v. Gunn, 154 N. Y. S. 705.

GUARDIAN AD LITEM.

See Infants.

HABEAS CORPUS.

See Jury, 19; Prohibition.

II. JURISDICTION, PROCEEDINGS,
AND RELIEF.

HIGHWAYS.

See Evidence, 67, 265; Municipal Corporations, 402, 657-706; Railroads, 91 99; Telegraphs and Telephones, 10.

II. HIGHWAY DISTRICTS AND

OFFICERS.

93 (N.Y.Sup.) Under Const. art. 13, § 1, Public Officers Law, §§ 5, 30, and Town Law, § 130, relator, elected as highway superintendent, who had filed defective oath and undertaking later than allowed by statute, held not entitled to oust defendant, appointed by town board.-People ex rel. Preston v. Keator, 154 N. Y. S. 1007.

HOLDING OVER.

90 (N.Y.) Code Civ. Proc. § 2039, does not prohibit a judge, in habeas corpus, to secure the release of a prisoner from an asylum for the criminally insane, on the ground of regained sanity, from calling a jury to aid him in deter- See Landlord and Tenant, 114–120. mining the issue.-People ex rel. Woodbury v. Hendrick, 109 N. E. 486, 215 N. Y. 339.

The judge, hearing habeas corpus proceedings to determine sanity of one committed to an asylum for the criminally insane, could call a jury to assist in the decision of such issue. -Id.

See Sunday.

788, 823.

HOLIDAYS.

HOMICIDE.

IV. ASSAULT WITH INTENT TO KILL.

90 (N.Y.Sup.) On return of habeas corpus See Criminal Law, 317, 387, 739, 741, 781, to obtain his discharge from a state hospital for the criminal insane, the court in its discretion and for its information might order the issue of insanity to be heard by a jury.-People ex rel. Thaw v. Grifenhagen. 154 N. Y. S. 965. Code Civ. Proc. §§ 2039, 2066, 2068, held not to prohibit determination of issues of fact on habeas corpus with the aid of a jury.-Id.

Proceeding on habeas corpus, whereon relator was entitled to a determination of the issue of his present sanity or insanity, held governed

100 (N.Y.Sup.) Defendant, jointly indicted with two others for assault with intent to kill, held properly convicted as a principal, under Penal Law, § 2, although his codefendants proved alibis; it being shown that defendant had acted in concert with the persons unknown who had committed the actual assault.-People v. Eichner, 154 N. Y. S. 44.

See Charities, 45; Jury, 19; Municipal See Bills and Notes, 254-320.
Corporations, 666; Nuisance, 3;
States, 112; Wills, 514.

36 (NY.Sup.) Contract of wife to pay husband installments of money, providing that it should not obligate him to pay her debts, held See Taxation, 879-895. not invalid, as against Domestic Relations Law, $51.-Werner v. Werner, 154 N. Y. S. 570.

74 (N.Y.Sup.) Owner of theater held entitled
an injunction preventing the commissioner

For cases in Dec. Dig. & Am. Dig. Key No. Series & Indexes see same topic and KEY-NUMBER
154 N.Y.S.-75

of licenses from revoking his theater license because of the production of a morally unobjectionable motion picture.-Life Photo Film Corporation v. Bell, 154 N. Y. S. 763.

(G) Personal Rights and Duties. 94 (N.Y.Sup.) Under Civil Rights Law, §§ 40, 41, providing for equal rights in places of public amusements, held that the statutory remedy was exclusive, so injunction will not lie to prevent plaintiff's exclusion from defendants' theater.-Woolcott v. Shubert, 154 N. Y. S. 643. 94 (N.Y.Sup.) A dramatic critic's action against the managers of theaters to recover for a violation of Civil Rights Law, § 40, as amended by Laws 1913, c. 265, held within the equitable jurisdiction of the court.-Woolcott v. Shubert, 154 N. Y. S. 754.

128 (N.Y.Sup.) In a suit for an injunction

to restrain violation of a contract for the sale
of an undivided interest in a proprietary rem-
edy business, evidence held not to show that
the defendant company practiced medicine.
Kilmer v. Dr. Kilmer & Co., 154 N. Y. S.
977.

IV. PRELIMINARY AND INTERLOCU-
TORY INJUNCTIONS.

bitrary restriction.-Stern v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 154 N. Y. S. 283.

While the Legislature may regulate the abuses of the insurance business, it cannot create a monopoly in such business, or authorize a public official to arbitrarily and capriciously give or withhold permission to pursue same.—Id.

4 (N.Y.Sup.) Insurance Law, § 91, giving the superintendent power to exclude persons from acting as insurance solicitors, is an unconstitutional interference with the liberty of the citizens.-Stern v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 154 N. Y. S. 283.

4 (N.Y.Sup.) Insurance Law, § 91, providing that the superintendent of insurance may in his discretion refuse to issue or renew a certificate to an insurance agent, held valid.Stern v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 154 N. Y. S. 472.

V. THE CONTRACT IN GENERAL. (A) Nature, Requisites, and Validity.

in application, not attached to and made a part 134 (N.Y.Sup.) Fraudulent representations of the policy, as required by Insurance Law, 58, held not to affect insurer's liability.-Mees 660.

Pittsburgh Life & Trust Co., 154 N. Y. S.

(B) Construction and Operation.

146 (N.Y.Sup.) Contracts of insurance, like other contracts, are to be construed according to the sense and meaning of the terms which the parties have used, and, if clear and unambiguous, the terms are to be taken and understood in their plain, ordinary, and proper sense. -Sasse v. Order of United Commercial Travelers of America, 154 N. Y. S. 558.

136 (N.Y.Sup.) Injunctions pendente lite, practically determining litigations and giving re- 146 (N.Y.Sup.) In construing the terms of an lief sought by judgment, should be cautiously insurance policy, where the meaning of the langranted and only of necessity.-McBride v. Ash-guage is doubtful, the construction more favorley, 154 N. Y. S. 1010.

able to the assured must be adopted.-Broadway Realty Co. v. Lawyers' Title Ins. & Trust Co., 154 N. Y. S. 1024.

147 (N.Y.Sup.) The Insurance Law of New York does not regulate the form or legal effect of insurance policies delivered elsewhere than in New York.-Mees v. Pittsburgh Life & Trust Co., 154 N. Y. S. 660.

IX. AVOIDANCE OF POLICY FOR
MISREPRESENTATION, FRAUD, OR
BREACH OF WARRANTY OR CON-
DITION.

(A) Grounds in General.

250 (N.Y.Sup.) Under Insurance Law, § 58. held, that neither fraud and misrepresentation by insured in procuring the policy nor a col

To jury, see Criminal Law, ~780-825; Trial, lateral agreement as to when it should be ef

252.

INSURANCE.

fective, not indorsed upon the policy, could be set up in defense to an action thereon.-Archer v. Equitable Life Assur. Society of United

See Constitutional Law, 62, 275; Execu- States, 154 N. Y. S. 519.
tion, 364; Licenses.

I. CONTROL AND REGULATION IN
GENERAL.

3 (N.Y.Sup.) Insurance is a legitimate business, in which any citizen of good character has a constitutional right to engage without ar

(C) Matters Relating to Person Insured.

291 (N.Y.Sup.) Recovery held improper against life insurance company on policy providing that no obligation was assumed unless, on date of issuance, the insured was alive and in sound health, where insured then had diabetes

of a year's standing, dying a month and a half | XX. MUTUAL BENEFIT INSURANCE. thereafter.-Holloway v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 154 N. Y. S. 194.

634 (N.Y.Sup.) Complaint in action upon certificate of accident insurance held fatally defective, for failure to plead the facts claimed to constitute waiver of provisions as to notice, proofs of death, etc.-Sasse v. Order of United Commercial Travelers of America, 154 N.67 (N.Y.Sup.) Verdict finding that no in terest was to be charged on the overdue account

640 (N.Y Sup.) Demurrer to defense setting held not to be against the weight of the evidence. up fraudulent representations in application not-Knickerbocker Portland Cement Co. v. Rukeyattached to policy held properly overruled, be- ser, 154 N. Y. S. 733. cause complaint did not show that policy was

665 (N.Y.Sup.) In an action upon a certifi- See Judgment, 650. cate of accident insurance, verdict for plaintiff held against the weight of the evidence.-Sasse v. Order of United Commercial Travelers of America, 154 N. Y. S. 558.

For cases in Dec. Dig. & Am. Dig. Key No. Series & Indexes see same topic and KEY-NUMBER

INTERPLEADER.

II. PROCEEDINGS AND RELIEF.

by such statements in the application therefor as are required or permitted by statute, and on which the right to issue a certificate depends. -Farley v. O'Brien, 154 N. Y. S. 1021.

24 (N.Y.Sup.) Defendant's affidavit supporting motion for interpleader, alleging claim71 (N.Y.Sup.) Under Liquor Tax Law, § 15, by person to be interpleaded for amount claimed by plaintiff, but failing to show validity of claim, or that defendant could not determine without risk to whom money should be paid, held insufficient to sustain order of interpleader.Cross & Brown Co. v. Ludin Realty Co., 154

N. Y. S. 26.

33 (N.Y.Sup.) An order of interpleader should require the interpleaded defendant to appear and answer the complaint in the same time that a defendant is required to answer a summons. Cross & Brown Co. v. Ludin Realty

Co., 154 N. Y. S. 26.

Where there was no compliance with an order of interpleader that an amended copy of the complaint be served by plaintiff upon the interpleaded defendant, judgment entered upon such defendant's failure to appear on the day set was void.-Id.

INTERSTATE COMMERCE.

subd. 3, as amended by Laws 1913, c. 168, and section 17, a county treasurer must refuse an application for a liquor tax certificate, where it appears therefrom that a notice of abandonment has been filed, whether such notice was valid or not.-Farley v. O'Brien, 154 N. Y. S.

1021.

82 (N.Y.Sup.) A liquor tax certificate, issued upon an application which showed on its face that a notice of abandonment had been filed, was void ab initio; and hence the bond accompanying such certificate was without consideration. Farley v. O'Brien, 154 N. Y. S. 1021.

106 (N.Y.Sup.) A petition to revoke a liquor tax certificate because petitioner's consent had not been obtained will not be denied where such consent was necessary, though petitioner's motive was to throw a competitor out of business. In re Grindrod, 154 N. Y. S. 929.

INVESTMENT.

See Executors and Administrators, 102.

ISSUES.

See Appeal, 173.

JITNEYS.

I. POWER TO CONTROL TRAFFIC. 6 (N.Y.Sup.) The Legislature has authority See Carriers, 4, 5. to control the traffic in liquors, and to determine whether such traffic should be permitted, and, if permitted, under what conditions.-People ex rel. Barclay v. Holmes, 154 N. Y. S. 163.

IV. LICENSES AND TAXES. 461/2 (N.Y.Sup.) Under Liquor Tax Law, § 8, subd. 10, as added by Laws 1913, c. 168, limiting certificates one to 7,500 population, held, that no liquor tax certificate under said section 8, subd. 2, could lawfully issue in a town of 2,900 population, which would permit the sale of liquors not to be drunk on the premises.-l'eople ex rel. Barclay v. Holmes, 154 N. Y. S. 163. 66 (N.Y.Sup.) Under Liquor Tax Law, 8 subd. 8, where premises were not used for the sale of liquor on March 23, 1896, or as a hotel, their use before issuance of certificate as a dry goods store was an abandonment for liquor purposes necessitating consent of adjacent dwellers. -In re Grindrod, 154 N. Y. S. 929.

See Action, 48.

JOINDER.

JOINT ADVENTURES.

See Partnership, 349.

(N.Y.Sup.) Agreement between plaintiff and defendant as to the purchase, sale, and disposition of goods on a joint account, each to share in the profits and losses, held a joint adLissberger Co., 154 N. Y. S. 556. venture or limited partnership.-Lobsitz v. E. 15,5 (N.Y.Sup.) An action in equity for an accounting is an appropriate remedy against a party to a joint adventure, or limited partnership, who has realized profits and has refused N. Y. S. 556. to account.-Lobsitz v. E. Lissberger Co., 154

JOINT TENANCY.

Under Liquor Tax Law, § 15, subd. 8, held, that where no consents had ever been obtained, See Tenancy in Common. and petitioner erected a dwelling within the prescribed distance, his consent to the use of the premises as a saloon is necessary.-Id.

69 (N.Y.Sup.) In the issuance of liquor tax certificates the county treasurer is bound only

JUDGES.

See Courts: Criminal Law, 1158; Justices of the Peace.