Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

& Hartford R. R. Co. (decided March 15, 1904)| PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with 87 N. Y. Supp. 67.

costs. Motion for leave to go to the Court of | Appeals granted.

PATTERSON, J., dissents.
KLOS V. BUFFALO, R. & P. RY. CO.
(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth
Department. March 22, 1904.) Action by Mar-

LAWSON, Respondent, V. SPEER, Appelgaret A. Klos, as administratrix, etc., against

lant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Serthe Buffalo, Rochester & Pittsburg Railway Company.

ond Departinent. April 22, 1904.) Action by

Robert Lawson against William McMurtrie PER CURIAM. Plaintiff's exceptions over

Speer. No opinion. Motion denied. ruled, and motion for new trial denied, with costs. HISCOCK, J., dissents.

LEE, Respondent, V. WASHBURN et al., Appellants. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department. March 15, 1904.)

| Action by Thomas F. Fitzhugh Lee against KOEHLER, Appellant, V. NEW YORK Cyrus V. Washburn and George W. Sickels. STEAM CO., Respondent. (Supreme Court, No opinion. Order affirmed, with $10 costs Appellate Division, First Department. April and disbursements. 8, 1904.) Action by Elizabeth Koehler, as administratrix, against the New York Steam Company. É. A. Alexander, for appellant. F. V. LEVIN v. DODD et al. (Supreme Court, ApJohnson, for respondent.

pellate Division, Second Department. March PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with

18, 1904.) Action by Jacob Leyin against Alli

son Dodd and others, copartners doing busicosts.

ness under the name and style of Hudson Coal HATCH, J., dissents.

Company, impleaded with George F. Hills. No opinion. Judgment and order unanimously af

firmed, with costs. KUDARA, Appellant, v. KUDARA, Respondent. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth LIGHT, Appellant, V. LIGHT, Respondent. Department. April 5, 1904.) Action by Yosaku (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, " Second Kudara against Otora Iriye Kudara.

Department. March 18, 1904.) Action by PER CURIAM. Order modified, so as to al- George K. Light against Etta A. Light. No low the defendant to appear, answer, and defend opinion. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disin this action; the judgment already entered bursements. to stand, pending the trial and determination of the action. As so modified, the order is affirmed, with costs.

LILLY, Respondent, V. PREFERRED ACWILLIAMS and STOVER, JJ., dissent, and

CIDENT INS. CO. OF NEW YORK, Appelare for affirmance generally.

| lant. _ (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department. March 18, 1904.) Action by Fannie E. Lilly against the Preferred Accident

Insurance Company of New York. No opinIn re KUNTZ. (Supreme Court, Appellate ion.. Judgment (83 N. Y. Supp. 585) affirmed.

sion. First Department. March 25. 1904.) on the law and facts, with costs. In the matter of Henry Kuntz. No opinion.

LINCOLN NAT. BANK V. FISCHERMotion denied.

HANSEN. (Supreme Court, Appellate Divi

sion, First Department. April 22, 1904.) ACLAMBERT, Respondent, V. METROPOLI

tion by the Lincoln National Bank against Carl TAN ST. RY. CO., Appellant. (Supreme

Fischer-Hansen. No opinion. Motion denied, Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

with $10 costs. March 18, 1904.) Action by William H. Lambert against the Metropolitan Street Railway

LINDNER, Appellant, V. BROOKLYN Company.

HEIGHTS R. CO., Respondent. (Supreme PER CURIAM. Judgment and order affirm Court, Appellate Division, Second Department. ed, with costs.

March 18, 1904.) Action by William Lindner WOODWARD, J., dissents.

against the Brooklyn Heights Railroad Company. No opinion. Judgment of the Municipal Court reversed, on argument, with costs to the

appellant, and action discontinued; the costs LANDAU, Appellant, v. CITY OF NEW of the appeal to be offset against costs of disYORK, Respondent. (Supreme Court, Appel- continuance to be taxed. late Division, First Department. April 22, 1904.) Action by Solomon Landau, as admin-1 LODGE, Appellant, v. DEMELT, Respondistrator, against the city of New York. C ent. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Steckler, for appellant. T. Farley, for respond- Fourth Department. March 22, 1904.) Action ent.

I by George Lodge against Mary Demelt.

Divis

and 121 New York State Reporter PER CURIAM. Judgment of County Court, ion. Appeal dismissed, on argument, with $10 reversed, and that of justice court affirmed, with costs and disbursements. costs in this court and in County Court. Held, that the verdict of the jury in justice's court

MCILVAINE v. STEINSON. (Supreme was sustained by the evidence.

Court, Appellate Division, First Department. LORD V. HULL. (Supreme Court, Appel

April 15, 1904.) Action by Tompkins Jelllate Division, First Department. April 15,

vaine against George Steinson. No opinion. 1901.) Action by Austin W. Lord against

Motion denied. Washington Hull. No opinion. Motion denied, with $10 costs.

MCINTYRE Respondent, . WESTERN

NEW YORK' CO-OPERATIVE FIRE INS. In re LUTTGEN et al. (Supreme Court, Ap

CO. OF MONROE COUNTY, Appellant. (Sapellate Division, First Department. April 15,

preme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth De 1904.) In the matter of Walter Luttgen and

partment. March 22, 1904.) Action by Hilton others. No opinion. Motion granted, and time

Clarence McIntyre against the Western New extended to July 1, 1904.

York Co-operative Fire Insurance Company of

Monroe County. No opinion. Judgment afLYONS, Respondent, v. INTERURBAN ST.

firmed, with costs. RY. CO., Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department. March 15, 1904.) Action by Lizzie Lyons against the In

MCLAUGHLIN V. O'ROURKE. (Supreme terurban Street Railway Company. · No opin

Court, Appellate Division, First Department. ion. Motion denied.

March 18, 1904.) Action by Margaret Me

Laughlin against John F. O'Rourke. No opidMcCALL CO., Appellant, V. EAGAN, Re

ion. Motion granted, so far as to dismiss ap spondent. (Supreme Court, 'Appellate Division, peal, with $10 costs. Second Department. April 22, 1904.) Action by the McCall Company against John B. Eagan. No opinion. Motion denied.

MCMAHON, Appellant, v. CRUCIBLE

STEEL CO. OF AJERICĂ, Respondent. (SuMCCONNELL. Respondent. v. TRADE PA- | preme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth De PER ADVERTISING AGENCY, Appellant.

partment. March 22, 1904.) Action by Veil (Supreme Court, Appellate Term.' March 24,

McMahon, an infant, against the Crucible 1904.) Action by George E. McConnell against

Steel Company of America. the Trade Paper Advertising Agency. From a PER QURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals. Af

costs. firmed. Abraham Benedict, for appellant. SPRING and HISCOCK, JJ., dissent. Charles L. Burr, for respondent. PER CURIAM. The plaintiff, an assignee,

MAGAR, Appellant, y. HAMMOND et al., sues for printing work done and labor perform

Respondents. (Supreme Court, Appellate Died by his assignors, the Mail & Express Job

vision, Second Department. April 22, 1901) Print, a domestic corporation. The sole question in the case was whether one Wray, who

Action by Frank L. Magar against Stoddard

Hammond and Edward Tompkins. contracted for the work to be done, was the agent of the defendant and authorized to order

PER CURIAM. Order modified, so as to al the work sued for. Upon this question there

low the plaintiff the fees for the term in Janwas a conflict of evidence. The testimony con

uary, 1900, of the witnesses Vandemark, Tutsists of 90 pages of typewritten matter, and we

hill, Ingraham, Wood, Rampe, Fitzgerald, have read it carefully. We think there was di

Holt, Vaughn, Hartig, Johnston, and Doughrect, as well as inferential, evidence from which erty, and, as modified, affirmed, without costs. the court below was justified in resolving that question in favor of the plaintiff. Some errors

In re MALCOM BREWING CO. (Supreme in the exclusion of testimony offered by the de- con

Court, Appellate Division, Second Department fendant appear in the record, but none that March 18," 1904.) In the matter of the volunnecessitate a reversal of the judgment. Judg

tary dissolution of Malcom Brewing Company, ment affirmed, with costs.

No opinion. Order affirmed, with $10 costs In re MCDERMOTT. (Supreme Court, Ap

and disbursements. pellate Division, First Department. April 8, 1904.) In the matter of Elizabeth McDermott. In re MALCOM BREWING CO. (Supreme C. Seasongood, for appellant. C. J. Dodd, for

Court, Appellate Division, Second Department respondent. No opinion. Order affirmed, with

April 22, 1904.) In the matter of the volun$10 costs and disbursements.

tary dissolution of Malcom Brewing Company.

No opinion. Motion denied. MCDONALD, Respondent, v. HOLBROOK, CABOT & DALY CONTRACTING CO., Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, MALLERY et al. v. FACER et al. (Supreme Second Department. March 18, 1904.) Action Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department. by Ida L. McDonald against the Holbrook, March 15, 1904.) Action by Margaret Mallery Cabot & Daly Contracting Company. No opin- and others against William Facer and others

No opinion. Motion for reargument denied, | JEISEX, Respondent, v. ROTHFELD, Apwithout costs.

pellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department. March 18, 1904.) Action

| by Michael F. Meisen against Isaac Rothfeld. MARINO, Respondent, v. INTERURBANNo opinion. Order aflirmed, on argument, with ST. RY. CO., Appellant. (Supreme Court, Ap- / $10 costs and disbursements. pellate Division, Second Department. April 15, 1904.) Action by Rocco Marino against the Interurban Street Railway Company. No opin- MILES, Respondent, v. FRANCIS_H. LEGion. Judgment of the Municipal Court unani-| GETT & CO., Appellant. (Supreme Court, Apmously affirmed, with costs.

pellate Division, Second Department. April

22, 1904.) Action by William O. Miles against MARTIN, Respondent, V. AMBROSE A. Francis H. Leggett & Co. No opinion. JudgGAVIGAN Co. et al., Appellants. (Supreme ment of the Municipal Court affirmed, by deCourt, Appellate Division, Second Department. fault, with costs. April 15, 1904.) Action by Francis P. Martin against the Ambrose A. Gavigan Company and the Dominican Convent of Our Lady of the

MILLER, Respondent, v. SENECA RIVER Rosary. No opinion. Appeal disinissed, with

disinissed." with | POWER CO. et al., Appellants. (Supreme costs.

Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.
April 5, 1904.) Action by John Charles Miller

against the Seneca River Power Company and MARTIN, Appellant, V. TIMM et al., Re- others. spondents. (Supreme Cburt, Appellate Divi-PER CURIAM. Judgment and order atsion, Fourth Department. March 22, 1904.) | firmed, with costs. Action by Winslow S. Martin against John W. WILLIAMS and HISCOCK, JJ., dissent. Timm and Ernestine Timm. No opinion. | Judgment affirmed, with costs.

MINER, Respondent, v. DELAWARE, L. & MARYLAND CASUALTY CO., Respond

W. R. CO., Appellant. (Supreme Court, Apent, v. BURNETTE Appellant. (Supreme

pellate Division, Fourth Department. March Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.

29, 1904.) Action by Lillie Miner against the March 22, 1904.) Action by the Maryland

Delaware, Lackawanna & Western Railroad

Company. Casualty Company against William C. Burnette. No opinion. Judgment affirmed, with

PER CURIAM. Judgment and order afirmcosts.

ed, with costs.

WILLIAMS, J., dissents. In re MAYOR, ETC., OF CITY OF NEW YORK. In re ELM ST. (Supreme Court, Ap- MINER, Respondent, V. DELAWARE, L. pellate Division, First Department. March 25, & W. R. CO., Appellant. (Supreme Court, Ap1904.) In the matter of the mayor, etc., of the pellate Division, Fourth Department. March city of New York. In the matter of Elm 29, 1904.) Action by Lillie Miner against the street. J. A. Deering, for appellant. J. P. Delaware, Lackawanna & Western Railroad Dunn, for respondent. No opinion. Order af- | Company. firmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. See PER CURIAM. Order denying motion to 72 N. Y. Supp. 378.

set aside verdict affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements.

WILLIAMS, J., dissents. In re MEAGHER. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department. April 15, 1904.) In the matter of William J. Meagher. No opinion. Attorney suspended for five MONTANYE. Respondent. Y. MONTAVYE. years. Memorandum per curiam.

Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, MEAGHER, Appellant, v. TUNIS et al.,

First Department. April 15, 1904.) Action by

5:: Susie E. Montanye, as administratrix, against Respondents. (Supreme Court, Appellate Di

George E. Montanye, impleaded. W. B. Sea. vision, Second Department. April 22, 1904.) Action by Mark C. Meagher against Oliver Ly

bury, for appellant. T. M. Roulette, for re man Tunis and Julia B. Tunis. No opinion.

spondent. No opinion. Judgment affirmed, with Interlocutory judgment affirmed, with costs, on

costs. the authority of Gilbert v. York, 111 N. Y. 544, 19 N. É. 268.

In re MORRISON. (Supreme Court, Appel

late Division, Third Department. March 15, MEIGGS, Appellant, V. HOAGLAND, Re

1904.) In the matter of the application of spondent. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division,

George H. Morrison to be restored to practice

as an attorney and counselor at law, under sec. Second Department. April 15, 1904.) Action

| tion 67 of the Code of Civil Procedure. by Mary A. Meiggs_against Raymond Hoagland. No opinion. Judgment affirmed, with

Judgment wirmed.withPER CURIAM. Motion denied. costs.

CHESTER, J., dissents.

and 121 New York State Reporter MUIRHEAD Y. HOLLANDER et al. (two | O'BRIEN, Appellant, . BUFFALO FUR. cases). (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, NACE CO., Respondent. (Supreme Court. Ad First Department. April 15, 1904.) Action by | pellate Division, Fourth Department. April Benjamiu C. Muirhead against Henry Holland- | 1901.) Action by Elizabeth O'Brien against the er and others. No opinion. Motions granted, Buffalo Furnace Company. No opinion. Judewith $10 costs of one motion.

ment and order affirmed, with costs. MULLIGAN. Respondent, V. METROPOLI. O'BRIEN, Appellant, Y. BUFFALO FURTAX ST. RY. CO., Appellant. (Supreme Court, NACE CO., Respondent. (Supreme Court, ADAppellate Division, Second Department. March pellate Division, Fourth Department. April 6, 18, 1901.) Action by Matthew Mulligan against | 1904.) Action by Elizabeth O'Brien against the the Metropolitan Street Railway Company. No Buffalo Furnace Company. opinion. Votion denied.

PER CURIAM. Upon filing the stipulation

of the attorneys for the respective parties to NATKINS v. WETTERER. (Supreme

this action, the order dismissing the appeal Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

herein is vacated and set aside, and the appeal March 25, 1904.) Action by I. Newton Natkins

| restored to the general calendar. against Matilda Wetterer. Yo opinion. Motion denied, on payment of $10 costs, and, on pay O'BRIEN v. O'BRIEN. (Supreme Court, Apment of an additional $10, leave given to apply | pellate Division, First Department. April 15. to the court below to open default.

1904.) Action by James O'Brien against Abbie

E. O'Brien. No opinion. Motion granted, with NELLIS et al., Respondents, v. NATIONAL $10 costs. UNION BANK, Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department. March 15, 1904.) Action by Joseph Nellis and others ODENDALL, Respondent, v. HAEBLER against the National Union Bank.

al., Appellants. (Supreme Court, Appellate DiPER CURIAM. Judgment modified, by strik- vision, First Department. April 8, 1904.) ACing out the sum of $250 granted as an extra al tion by Anton Odendall against Theodore Haeblowance of costs to the plaintiff, and, as so mod ler and others. R. B. Honeyman, for appel ified, affirmed, with costs.

lants. H. Siegrist, Jr., for respondent. Vo

opinion. Order affirmed, with costs. NELLIS et al., Respondents, v. NATIONAL UNION BANK, Appellant. (Supreme Court, O'GORMAN, Respondent, v. LONDON Appellate Division, Fourth Department. March GUARANTEE & ACCIDENT CO., Limited. 15, 1904.) Action by Joseph Nellis and others Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Diri. against the National Union Bank.

sion, Fourth Department. April 5, 1904.) A PER CURIAM. Judgment modified, by strik- tion by James R. O'Gorman against the London ing out the sum of $250 granted as an extra al- | Guarantee & Accident Company, Limited. lowance of costs to the plaintiffs, and also by! PER CURIAM. Judgment and order afirmustriking out the allowance of interest at the ed, with costs. rate of 3 per cent. upon the sum of $2,968.02 SPRING and WILLIAMS, JJ., dissent, apca deposited with the defendant pending the litiga- the ground that the verdict is excessive, tion, and, as so modified, said judgment is affirmed, without costs of this appeal to either party.

O'MEARA, Respondent, V. BROOKLYN

HEIGHTS R. CO., Appellant. (Supreme NELSON, Respondent, v. YOUNG, Appellant, Court, Appellate Division, Second Department et al. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Sec- March 18, 1904.) Action by Catharine O'Mears. ond Department. April 29, 1904.) Action by as administratrix, etc., of John A. O'Meara, de Matilda Nelson, as administratrix, etc., against ceased, against the Brooklyn Heights Railroad William Young, impleaded, etc. No opinion. Company. No opinion. Judgment and orde: Motion for reargument denied, with $10 costs. revérsed, and new trial granted, costs to abide Motion for leave to appeal to the Court of Ap- the event, because of error in refusal to charge peals denied, without costs.

| request appearing at folio 205 of the printed

case. NEWGASS, Appellant, v. AUBURN LOAN CO. et al., Respondents. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department. March | In re ORR et al. (Supreme Court, Appellate 29, 1904.) Action by Nettie Newgass against Division, First Department. April 15, 1904.) the Auburn Loan Company and others. No In the matter of Alexander E. Orr and others. opinion. Judgment and order affirmed, with No opinion. Application granted. costs.

ORVIS, Respondent, V. NATIONAL COM

MERCIAL BANK, Appellant. (Supreme

IAN, Appel- / Court. Appellate Division. First Department lant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Sec- April 22, 1904.) Action by Sarah H. Orris, erond Department. April 15, 1904.) Action by ecutrix, against the National Commercial Bank. John Voon against Sarah Croghan. No opinion. | H. A. Forster, for appellant. J. F. Miller, for Judgment of the Municipal Court affirmed, with respondent. No opinion. Judgment atirmed costs.

with costs..

ndent. V

OSBORX, Respondent, v. CARDEZA et al., 1 PER CURIAM. Judgment of conviction reAppellants. (Supreme Court, Appellate Divi- versed, and new trial ordered. sion, Second Department. April 29, 1904.) AC-1 McLENXAN, P. J., and STOVER, J., distion by Ellen C. Osborn against Howard J. M. sent. Cardeza and others. No opinion. Motion granted, and order resettled.

PEOPLE v. CARUCCI et al. (Supreme PACKARD, Respondent, v. ELSOHN, Appel-Court, Appellate Division, First Department. lant, et al. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, March 18, 1904.) Proceeding by the people of Fourth Department. March 29, 1904.) Action the state of New York against Rosario Carucci by Samuel Packard against Levi Elsohn, im- and others. No opinion. Motion granted. pleaded, etc.

PER CURIAM. Judgment and orders affirm PEOPLE, Respondeut, v. DAHL, Appellant. ed, with costs.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second HISCOCK, J., not sitting.

Department. April 15, 1904.) Proceeding by

the people of the state of New York against PARDINGTON, Respondent, v. ABRAHAM

Charles H. Dahl. No opinion. Judgment of

conviction affirmed. . et al., Appellants. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department. April 29, 1904.)PEOPLE. Respondent, V. GORDON. AppelAction by Eliza C. Pardington against Abraham

lant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Abraham and others. No opinion. Motion

First Department. April 8, 1904.) Proceeding granted, and order signed.

by the people of the state of New York against PEARSALL V. ROSEBROOK et al. (Su

George Gordon. P. A. McManus, for appel

lant. R. C. Tatlor, for the People. No opinion. preme Court, Appellate Division, Second Depart

Judgment affirmed. ment, March 15, 1904.) Action by Hannah G. I. Pearsall, an infant, by Katherine Smith, PEOPLE. Appellant, v. HEINEMAN, Reher guardian ad litem, against Annie E. Rose

spondent. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, brook and others. No opinion. Appeal dismiss

First Department. April 8, 1904.) Proceeding ed, without costs.

by the people of the state of New York against Isaac Heineman. F. S. Black, for the People.

L. Marshall, for respondent. No opinion. PEEVERS, Apnellant, v. RATCHFORD, Ju Respondent. (Supreme Court, Appellate Divi- Cohen (decided Feb. 5. 1904) 86 N. Y. Supp.

D. Judgment affirmed, on the opinion in People v. sion, Fourth Department. April 6, 1904.) AC-475 tion by Catharine Peevers against James E. Ratchford.

PER CURIAM. The counsel for both par- 1 PEOPLE V. HENRY HEINZ CO. et al. ties having appeared in open court and con- (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Desented thereto, the judgment from which the partment. April 5, 1904.) Proceeding by the appeal herein was taken is affirmed, without people of the state of New York against the costs of this appeal to either party.

Henry Heinz Company and another. No opin

ion. Motion for reargument denied. Motion PELZEL, Respondent, v. SCHEPP, Appel- for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals lant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, granted. Questions certified to be settled by First Department. March 25, 1904.) Action and before Mr. Justice STOVER upon two by August Pelzel against Leopold Schepp. H. I days' notice. S. Marshall, for appellant. O. Steckler, for respondent. No opinion. Judgment and order affirmed, with costs.

PEOPLE V. MARTIN et al. (Supreme

Court, Appellate Division. First Department. PELZEL V. SCHEPP. (Supreme Court, Ap

March 18, 1904.) Proceeding by the people of pellate Division, First Department. April 15,

the state of New York against Joseph Martin 1904.) Action by August Pelzel against Leo

and another. No opinion. Motion granted. pold Schepp. No opinion. Motion denied, with $10 costs.

PEOPLE ex rel. ATLANTIC TELEPHONE CO., Appellant, v. MONROE, Com'r, Respond

ent. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division. First PEOPLE, Respondent, v. BEEHLER et al., Department. April 15, 1904.) Proceeding by Appellants. (Supreme Court. Appellate Divi

the people of the state of New York, on the sion, First Department. March 25, 1904.) Pro relation of the Atlantic Telephone Company,

W. ceeding by the people of the state of New | against Robert G. Monroe, commissioner. York against Albert Beehler and John Bayam. | H. Slayton, for appellant. T. Connoly, for reR. M. Moore, for appellants. H. S. Gans, for spondent. the People. No opinion. Judgment affirmed. I PER CURIAM. Order affirmed, with $10

costs and disbursements. PEOPLE, Respondent, V. BROWN, Appel LAUGHLIN, J., dissents. lant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department. April 6, 1904.) Proceeding by the people of the state of New York PEOPLE ex rel. BARNARD COLLEGE. agaiust Samuel Brown,

| Appellant, v. WELLS et al., Respondents. (Su

« AnteriorContinuar »