CULLEN, C. J., and EDWARD T. BARTLETT, HAIGHT, VANN, WILLARD BARTLETT, and CHASE, JJ., concur. GRAY, J., not sitting.

FARRELL, Respondent, v. RYAN et al., Appellants. ( (Court of Appeals of New York. Oct. 27, 1905.) Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Third Judicial Department (90 App. Div. 617, 85 N. Y. Supp. 1130), entered March 9, 1904. affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a decision of the court on trial at Special Term. W. H. Johnson and Watson Lamont, for appellants. Herman Aaron and John H. Rogan, for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with costs.

CULLEN, C. J., and BARTLETT, HAIGHT, VANN, and WERNER, JJ., concur. GRAY and O'BRIEN, JJ., absent.

FERGUSON v. TOLEDO, A. A. & N. M. R. Co. et al. (Court of Appeals of New York. Jan. 9, 1906.) Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department (85 App. Div. 352, 83 N. Y. Supp. 283), entered July 24, 1903, affirming a judgment in favor of defendant respondent entered upon a dismissal of the complaint by the court on trial at Special Term. John M. Bower, for appellant. Howard Mansfield and Herbert C. Lakin, for respondent Ann Arbor R. Co.

PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with costs.

CULLEN, C. J., and GRAY, O'BRIEN, BARTLETT, HAIGHT, VANN, and WERNER, JJ., concur.

FILBERT, Appellant, v. NEW YORK, N. H. & H. R. CO., Respondent. (Court of Appeals of New York. Feb. 6, 1906.) Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department (95 App. Div. 199, 88 N. Y. Supp. 438), entered March 11. 1905, affirming a judgment in favor of defendant entered upon a dismissal of the complaint by the court at a Trial Term. Robert H. Barnett, for appellant. Walter C. Anthony, for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with costs.

CULLEN, O. J., and GRAY, O'BRIEN, BARTLETT, WERNER, HISCOCK, and

CHASE, JJ., concur.

FINN, Respondent, v. IRONCLAD MFG. CO., Appellant. (Court of Appeals of New York. March 6, 1906.) Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department (99 App. Div. 625, 90 N. Y. Supp. 887), entered December 6, 1904, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict and an order denying a motion for a new trial. John J. Kuhn and William N. Dykman, for appellant. James C. Cropsey and F. W. Catlin, for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with

costs.

GRAY, EDWARD T. BARTLETT, HAIGHT, VANN, and CHASE, JJ., concur. CULLEN, C. J., absent. WILLARD BARTLETT, J., not sitting.

FOX, Respondent, v. ERBE et al., Appellants. (Court of Appeals of New York. Feb. 16, 1906.) Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the

First Judicial Department (100 App. Div. 343, 91 N. Y. Supp. 832), entered February 18, 1905, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a decision of the court on trial at Special Term. James P. Niemann, for appellants. Grant C. Fox, for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with costs.

CULLEN, C. J., and GRAY, O'BRIEN, BARTLETT, WERNER, HISCOCK, and CHASE, JJ., concur.

V.

GADSKI-TAUSCHER, Respondent, GRAFF, Appellant. (Court of Appeals of New York. March 6, 1906.) Motion to dismiss an appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department (103 App. Div. 596, 92 N. Y. Supp. 1124), entered June 17, 1905, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a decision of the court on trial at Special Term. The motion was made upon the ground that the action was for services, the judgment of affirmance by the Appellate Division unanimous, and, therefore, not appealable to the Court of Appeals, except by permission, which had not been granted. Henry N. Wessel, for the motion. Walter M. Rosebault, opposed.

PER CURIAM. Motion granted, and appeal dismissed, with costs and $10 costs of motion, on the ground that the complaint is clearly one to recover for services rendered, and the character of the action is determined by the complaint, within the meaning of section 191 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

GANGUZZA, Appellant, v. ANCHOR LINE (HENDERSON BROS., Limited). Respondent. (Court of Appeals of New York. Feb. 27, 1906.) Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department (97 App. Div. 352, 89 N. Y. Supp. 1049), entered October 22, 1904, affirming a judgment in favor of defendant entered upon a verdict and an order denying a motion for a new trial. Louis O. Van Doren, for appellant. Everett Masten, for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with

costs.

CULLEN. C. J., and GRAY, EDWARD T. BARTLETT, HAIGHT. VANN. and CHASE, JJ., concur. WILLARD BARTLETT, J., not sitting.

GENEVA MINERAL SPRINGS CO., Appellant, v. STEELE, Respondent, et al. (Court of Appeals of New York. Feb. 27, 1906.) Motion to dismiss an appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of Supreme Court in the Fourth Judicial Department (102 App. Div. 620, 92 N. Y. Supp. 1125), entered March 11, 1905, which affirmed an order of Special Term denying plaintiff's motion to set aside the report of a referee and for a new trial. The motion was made upon the grounds that the order appealed from was an intermediate one, and so not appealable as of right to the Court of Appeals, and that permission to appeal had not been granted. William S. Moore, for the motion. John Gillette, opposed.

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

GERMANIA LIFE INS. CO., Appellant, v. CASEY, Respondent, et al. (two cases). (Court of Appeals of New York. Feb. 27, 1906.) Appeal in each of the above-entitled actions from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department (98 App. Div. 88. 90 N. Y. Supp. 418; 98 App. Div. 619, 90 N. Y Supp 1097), entered

December 2, 1904, affirming a judgment in favor of defendant entered upon a dismissal of the complaint by the court on trial at Special Term. Henry B. Pogson, for appellant. Benjamin N. Cardozo and Jacob Steinhardt, for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Judgment in each action affirmed, with costs, upon the ground that the second conclusion of law by the trial court is in part a finding of fact as to an agreement between the plaintiff and the owner of the property for an extension of the time for the payment of the principal sum secured by the mortgage.

GRAY, EDWARD T. BARTLETT, VANN, and WILLARD BARTLETT, JJ., concur. HAIGHT and CHASE, JJ., dissent. CUL LEN, C. J., absent.

GORHAM, Respondent, v. VOUGHT et al., Appellants. (Court of Appeals of New York. Jan. 30, 1906.) Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department (97 App. Div. 632, 89 N. Y. Supp. 1105), entered August 8, 1904, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a decision of the court on trial at Special Term. John L. Hill and Robert L. Redfield, for appellants. Charles Haines, for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with costs.

CULLEN, C. J., and O'BRIEN, HAIGHT, VANN, WERNER, BARTLETT, and HIS COCK, JJ., concur.

GRAND TRUNK RY. CO. OF CANADA, Appellant, v. STATE, Respondent. (Court of Appeals of New York. Feb. 6, 1906.) Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Third Judicial Department (97 App. Div. 634, 89 N. Y. Supp. 1105), entered November 15, 1904, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon an award of the Court of Claims. William L. Marcy, for appellant. Julius M. Mayer, Atty. Gen. (Horace McGuire, of counsel), for the State.

PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with costs.

CULLEN, C. J., and GRAY, O'BRIEN, BARTLETT, WERNER, and HISCOCK, JJ., concur. CHASE, J., not sitting.

GRIEBEL, Appellant, V. BROOKLYN HEIGHTS R. CO., Respondent. (Court of Appeals of New York. Feb. 13, 1906.) Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department (95 App. Div. 214, 88 N. Y. Supp. 767), entered June 23, 1904, affirming a judgment in favor of defendant entered upon a verdict and an order denying a motion for a new trial. J. Stewart Ross, for appellant. I. R. Oeland and George D. Yeomaus, for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with costs.

CULLEN, C. J., and GRAY, O'BRIEN, BARTLETT, WERNER, HISCOCK, and CHASE, JJ., concur.

Cossum, for appellants. Alton B. Parker, Frank B. Lown, and Allison Butts, for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Order affirmed, with costs.

HAIGHT, VANN, WERNER, and HISCOCK, JJ., concur. CULLEN, C. J., and O'BRIEN, J., dissent. BARTLETT, J., not sitting.

HANCOCK, Respondent, v. NEW YORK CENT. & H. R. R. CO., Appellant. (Court of Appeals of New York. Feb. 16, 1906.) Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Fourth Judicial Department (100 App. Div. 161, 91 N. Y. Supp. 601), entered March 24, 1904, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict and an order denying a motion for a new trial. Daniel M. Beach, for appellant. E. A. Griffith, for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with costs.

CULLEN, C. J., and O'BRIEN, BARTLETT, WERNER, and CHASE, JJ., concur. GRAY and HISCOCK, JJ., not sitting.

HANDY, Respondent, v. METROPOLITAN ST. RY. CO., Appellant. (Court of Appeals of New York. Nov. 21, 1905.) Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department (94 App. Div. 620, 88 N. Y. Supp. 1103), entered June 3, 1904, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict and an order denying a motion for a new trial. Charles F. Brown, Bayard H. Ames, and Henry A. Robinson, for appellant. James Russell Soley, for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with costs.

CULLEN, C. J., and BARTLETT, VANN, and WERNER, JJ., concur. HAIGHT, J., dissents. GRAY, J., not sitting. O'BRIEN, J., absent.

HAWLEY, Respondent, v. UNITED STATES FIDELITY & GUARANTY CO., Appellant. (Court of Appeals of New York, Feb. 27, 1906.) Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Fourth Judicial Department (100 App. Div. 12, 90 N. Y. Supp. 893), entered December 21, 1904, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict directed by the court and an order denying a motion for a new trial. George P. Keating, for appellant. Henry W. Killeen and V. H. Riordan, for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with costs.

CULLEN, C. J., and GRAY, EDWARD T. BARTLETT, HAIGHT, VANN, WILLARD BARTLETT, and CHASE, JJ., concur.

HOGG et al. v. ROSE et al. (Court of Appeals of New York. Jan. 16, 1906.) No opinion. Motion to amend remittitur denied, with $10 costs. See 183 N. Y. 182, 76 N. E. 38.

HOLCOMB, Respondent, v. NEW YORK CENT. & H. R. R. CO., Appellant. (Court of Appeals of New York. Nov. 21, 1905.) Appeal from a judgment, entered February 1, 1905, upon an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Fourth Judicial Department (100 App. Div. 512, 91 N. Y. Supp. 1097), which affirmed an order made at a Trial Term denying a motion for a new trial after the rendition of a verdict in favor of plaintiff. Daniel M. Beach, for appellant. William S. Jenney, for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with

costs.

CULLEN, C. J. and BARTLETT, HAIGHT, VANN, and WERNER, JJ., concur. GRAY, J., not sitting. O'BRIEN, J., absent.

HOOKE, Respondent, v. FINANCIER CO., Appellant. (Court of Appeals of New York. Feb. 16, 1906.) Cross-appeals from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department (99 App. Div. 186, 90 N. Y. Supp. 1012), entered December 19, 1904, modifying, and affirming as modified, a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon the report of a referee. John J. O'Connell, for plaintiff. Theron G. Strong, for defendant.

PER CURIAM. The stipulation of the parties was plainly intended to eliminate from the appeal all questions relating to the amount of the judgment. We find that the contracts of employment were valid and binding obligations of the defendant, and that that part of the judg ment appealed from by the plaintiff, appellant, should be reversed, and the judgment as entered upon the report of the referee should be affirmed, with costs to the plaintiff in the Appellate Division and in this court.

CULLEN, C. J., and GRAY, O'BRIEN, BARTLETT, WERNER, HISCOCK, and CHASE, JJ., concur.

HUDSON, Appellant, v. ERIE R. R. CO., Respondent. (Court of Appeals of New York. Jan. 9, 1906.) Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department (92 App. Div. 621, 86 N. Y. Supp. 1138), entered March 23, 1904, affirming a judgment in favor of defendant entered upon a dismissal of the complaint by the court at a Trial Term. John M. Gardner, for appellant. Henry Bacon and Joseph Merritt, for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with

costs.

CULLEN, C. J., and GRAY, O'BRIEN, BARTLETT, HAIGHT, VANN, and WERNER, JJ., concur.

HUNT, Respondent, V. DEXTER SULPHITE PULP & PAPER CO., Appellant. (Court of Appeals of New York. Dec. 12, 1905.) Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Fourth Judicial Department (100 App. Div. 119, 91 N. Y. Supp. 279), entered January 13, 1905, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict and an order denying a motion for a new trial. Henry Purcell, for appellant. A. E. Kilby, for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with costs.

CULLEN. C. J., and GRAY, O'BRIEN, BARTLETT, HAIGHT, VANN, and WERNER, JJ., concur.

HUNT, Respondent, v. THOMPSON, Appelant. (Court of Appeals of New York. January 9, 1906.) Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department (97 App. Div. 633, 89 N. Y. Supp. 1107), entered October 5, 1904, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon the report of a referee. Walter Farrington. A. M. Card, and G. Card, for appellant. Charles Morschauser, for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with costs.

CULLEN, C. J., and GRAY, O'BRIEN, BARTLETT, HAIGHT, VANN, and WERNER, JJ., concur.

IRISH, Respondent, v. UNION BAG & PAPER CO., Appellant. (Court of Appeals of New York. Oct. 27, 1905.) Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Third Judicial Department (103 App. Div. 45, 92 N. Y. Supp. 695), entered March 11, 1905, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict and an order denying a motion for a new trial. Edgar T. Brackett, for appellant. Lewis E. Carr and A. D. Arnold, for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with costs.

CULLEN, C. J., and BARTLETT, VANN, and WERNER, JJ., concur. GRAY, J., not voting. O'BRIEN and HAIGHT, JJ., absent.

JACKSON, Respondent, V. LAWYERS' SURETY CO. OF NEW YORK, Appellant. (Court of Appeals of New York. Feb. 6, 1906.) Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First_Judicial Department (95 App. Div. 368, 88 N. Y. Supp. 576), entered July 11, 1904, reversing a judgment in favor of defendant entered upon a verdict by the court and directing judgment in favor of plaintiff for the relief demanded in the complaint. Francis Smyth and George W. Wickersham, for appellant. Edward W. S. Johnston, for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with costs, on opinion below.

CULLEN, C. J., and GRAY, O'BRIEN, BARTLETT, WERNER, HISCOCK, and CHASE, JJ., concur.

JACOBS, Appellant, v. COHEN et al., Respondents. (Court of Appeals of New York. Feb. 6, 1906.) No opinion. Motion for reargument denied, with $10 costs. See 183 N. Y. 207, 76 N. E. 5.

JANPOLE et al., Respondents, v. LASKY, Appellant. (Court of Appeals of New York. Feb. 16, 1906.) Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department (94 App. Div. 353, 88 N. Y. Supp. 50), entered February 6, 1905, in favor of plaintiffs upon the submission of a controversy under section 1279 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Samuel D. Lasky, for appellant. Moses Esberg, for respondents. PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with costs, on opinion below.

CULLEN, C. J., and GRAY, O'BRIEN, BARTLETT, WERNER, HISCOOK, and CHASE, JJ., concur.

KABLE. Respondent, v. ROCHESTER GAS & ELECTRIC CO., Appellant. (Court of Appeals of New York. Nov. 21, 1905.) Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division_of the Supreme Court in the Fourth Judicial Department (96 App. Div. 639, 89 N. Y. Supp. 1108), entered July 13, 1904, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict and an order denying a motion for a new trial. Albert H. Harris, for appellant. George Raines and H. W. Rippey, for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with costs.

CULLEN, C. J., and GRAY, BARTLETT, HAIGHT, VANN, and WERNER, JJ., concur. O'BRIEN, J., absent.

KAHNER, Respondent, v. OTIS ELEVATOR CO., Appellant. (Court of Appeals of New York. Nov. 21, 1905.) Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department

(96 App. Div. 169, 89 N. Y. Supp. 185), entered July 27, 1904, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict. William B. Hornblower and Mark W. Potter, for appellant. Charles F. Brown and Sumner B. Stiles, for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with costs, on the ground that the questions raised by the appellant do not survive the unanimous affirmance by the Appellate Division.

CULLEN, C. J., and GRAY, BARTLETT, HAIGHT, VANN, and WERNER, JJ., concur. O'BRIEN, J., absent.

KALB et al., Appellants, v. KALB, Respondent. (Court of Appeals of New York. Oct. 27, 1905.) Appeal from a judgment, entered January 19, 1905, upon an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Fourth Judicial Department (98 App. Div. 634, 90 N. Y. Supp. 1101), which overruled plaintiffs' exceptions ordered to be heard in the first instance by the Appellate Division, denied a motion for a new trial, and directed judgment for defendant on a verdict directed at a Trial Term. George D. Forsyth, for appellants. Eugene Van Voorhis, for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with

costs.

CULLEN, C. J., and GRAY, BARTLETT, HAIGHT, VANN, and WERNER, JJ., concur. O'BRIEN, J., absent.

KATZ, Appellant, v. H. & H. MFG. CO., Respondent. (Court of Appeals of New York. Jan. 30, 1906.) Appeal, by permission, from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department (109 App. Div. 49, 95 N. Y. Supp. 663), entered December 12, 1905, which reversed an order of Special Term continuing a preliminary injunction to restrain the election of directors of the defendant company. The following questions were certified: "(1) The by-laws of the defendant corporation provide that the directors shall be five in number, and also provide that 'stockholders by a vote of 90 per cent. of the stock issued and outstanding may at any regular or special meeting, alter or amend' the by-laws. A meeting was duly called for the purpose of adopting a resolution to decrease the number of directors from five to four and to amend the provision of the by-laws by substituting the word 'four' for the word 'five' with respect to the number of directors. The holders and owners of more than 50 per cent. of the issued and outstanding stock of the defendant, but less than 90 per cent. of such stock, duly voted in favor of this resolution. Was it lawful for the company to reduce its number of directors by a vote of the holders of more than 50 per cent. but less than 90 per cent. of the issued and outstanding stock of the defendant where all the statutory requirements have been complied with? (2) Is it lawful for a corporation to provide in its by-laws that a vote of the holders of 90 per cent. of its issued and outstanding stock shall be required in order to change the number of directors, notwithstanding section 21 of the stock corporation law?" Herbert R. Limburger, for appellant. William H. Hirsh, for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Order affirmed, with costs. First question certified answered in the affirmative; second, in the negative.

CULLEN, C. J., and O'BRIEN, HAIGHT, VANN, WERNER, BARTLETT, and HIS COCK, JJ., concur.

KAUFMAN, Respondent, v. ROSENSHINE et al., Appellants. (Court of Appeals of New York. Jan. 9, 1906.) Appeal from a judgment

KEMBLE, Respondent, v. RONDOUT NAT. BANK OF KINGSTON, Appellant. (Court of Appeals of New York. Dec. 12, 1905.) Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Third Judicial Department (94 App. Div. 544, 88 N. Y. Supp. 246), entered May 13, 1904, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict and an order denying a motion for a new trial. Howard Chipp, for appellant. John W. Searing and William D. Brinnier, for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with

costs.

CULLEN, C. J., and GRAY, O'BRIEN, BARTLETT, HAIGHT, VANN, and WERNER, JJ., concur.

KIRKPATRICK, Appellant, v. ALLEMANNIA FIRE INS. CO., Respondent. (Court of Appeals of New York. Feb. 27, 1906.) Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department (102 App. Div. 327, 92 N. Y. Supp. 466), entered March 10, 1905, affirming a judg ment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict and an order denying a motion for a new trial. William B. Ellison and Arnold L. Davis, for appellant. Edgar J. Nathan and Michael H. Cardozo, for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with costs.

CULLEN, C. J., and GRAY, EDWARD T. BARTLETT, HAIGHT, VANN, WILLARD BARTLETT, and CHASE, JJ., concur.

LA MONTAGNE et al., Appellants, v. BANK of NEW YORK NAT. BANKING ASS'N, Respondent. (Court of Appeals of New York. Jan. 16, 1906.) No opinion. Motion for reargument denied, with $10 costs. See 183 N. Y. 173, 76 N. E. 33.

LAWRENCE BROS., Inc., Respondent, v. HEYLMAN, Appellant. (Court of Appeals of New York. Feb. 13, 1906.) Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department (89 App. Div. 620, 85 N. Y. Supp. 789), entered January 13, 1904, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict and an order denying a motion for a new trial. Thaddeus D. Kenneson and Henry B. Heyl man, for appellant. Ralph Earl Prime, Jr., and A. J. Prime, for respondent.

PER OURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with

613, 88 N. Y. Supp. 1105), entered June 2, 1904, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiffs entered upon a verdict and an order denying a motion for a new trial. James M. E. O'Grady, for appellant. Philetus Chamberlain, for respondents.

PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with costs.

CULLEN, O. J., and GRAY, O'BRIEN, BARTLETT, HAIGHT, VANN, and WERNER, JJ., concur.

L. D. GARRETT CO., Appellant, v. APPLE TON, Respondent. (Court of Appeals of New York. March 6, 1906.) Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department (101 App. Div. 507, 92 N. Y. Supp. 136), entered February 24, 1905, reversing a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a decision of the court on trial at Special Term and granting a new trial. Edgar J. Nathan and Michael H. Cardozo, for appellant. Charles E. Lydecker, for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Order affirmed, and judgment absolute ordered against the plaintiff on the stipulation, with costs in all the courts, on opinion below.

GRAY, EDWARD T. BARTLETT, HAIGHT, VANN, WILLARD BARTLETT, and CHASE, JJ., concur. CULLEN, C. J., absent.

L. D. GARRETT CO., Appellant, v. CLARK, Respondent. (Court of Appeals of New York. March 6, 1906.) Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department (102 App. Div. 611, 92 N. Y. Supp. 1132), entered February 24, 1905, reversing a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a decision of the court on trial at Special Term and granting a new trial. Edgar J. Nathan and Michael H. Cardozo, for appellant. Alfred B. Cruikshank, for respond

ent.

PER CURIAM. Order affirmed, and judgment absolute ordered against the plaintiff on the stipulation, with costs in all the courts, on opinion below.

GRAY, EDWARD T. BARTLETT, HAIGHT, VANN, WILLARD BARTLETT, and CHASE, JJ., concur. CULLEN, C. J., absent.

LICHTENSTEIN, Respondent, v. RABOLINSKY, Appellant. (Court of Appeals of New York. Feb. 6, 1906.) Appeal from a judgment entered in favor of plaintiff December 29, 1904, upon an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Fourth Judicial Department (98 App. Div. 516, 90 N. Y. Supp. 247), which reversed an order of the court at a Trial Term granting a motion for a new trial after a verdict in favor of plaintiff and directed judgment on the verdict. Maulsby Kimball, for appellant. August Becker, for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with costs.

CULLEN. C. J., and GRAY, O'BRIEN, BARTLETT, WERNER, and CHASE, JJ., concur. HISCOCK, J., not sitting.

LINTON, Appellant, v. LONG ISLAND R. Co., Respondent. (Court of Appeals of New York. Jan. 9, 1906.) Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department (91 App. Div. 515, 86 N. Y. Supp. 903), entered March 12, 1904, affirming a judgment in favor of defendant entered upon a dismissal of the_complaint by the court at a Trial Term. R. Percy

Chittenden, for appellant. George W. Wingate and Joseph F. Keany, for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with costs, on the ground that under the statute the plaintiff's claim is against the fund provided by the municipality and not against the defendant.

CULLEN, C. J., and GRAY, O'BRIEN, BARTLETT, HAIGHT, VANN, and WERNER, JJ., concur.

LIVINGSTON et al., Respondents, v. STAFFORD, Commissioner of Highways et al.. Appellants. (Court of Appeals of New York. February 16, 1906.) Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Third Judicial Department (99 App. Div. 108, 91 N. Y. Supp. 172), entered December 17, 1904, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiffs entered upon a decision of the court at a Trial Term without a jury. Frederick Collin, for appellants. Andrew J. Nellis and Robert F. Livingston, for respondents.

PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with costs, on the opinions of the Trial Term and Appellate Division below.

CULLEN, C. J., and GRAY, BARTLETT, WERNER, and HISCOCK, JJ., concur. O'BRIEN, J., dissents. CHASE, J., not sitting.

LORY, Respondent, v. TOWN OF HERKIMER, Appellant. (Court of Appeals of New York. Oct. 27, 1905.) Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Fourth Judicial Department (97 App. Div. 642, 90 N. Y. Supp. 1104), entered October 19, 1904, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict and an order denying a motion for a new trial. Ch. D. Thomas, for appellant. A. B. Steele and Arleigh D. Richardson, for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with

costs.

CULLEN, C. J., and GRAY, BARTLETT, HAIGHT, VANN, and WERNER, JJ., concur. O'BRIEN, J., absent.

LOWTHER et al. v. ABEL et al. (Court of Appeals of New York. Feb. 13, 1906.) Motion to dismiss an appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department (108 App. Div. 365, 95 N. Y. Supp. 1142), entered December 8. 1905, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiffs entered upon a decision of the court on trial at Special Term. The motion was made upon the ground that the decision of the Appellate Division was unanimous, and that therefore no question is presented that the Court of Appeals has jurisdiction to review. W. H. Van Benschoten, for the motion. Franklin Bien, opposed.

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

MCGOVERN, Respondent, v. MANHATTAN, RY. CO., Appellant. (Court of Appeals of New York. March 6, 1906.) Motion to dismiss an appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department (110 App. Div. 96 N. Y. Supp. 1134), entered January 12, 1906, which affirmed an order of the court at a Trial Term denying a motion for a new trial. The motion was made upon the ground that the order was not appealable as of right to the Court of Appeals and permission to appeal had not been granted. Augustus Van Wyck, for the motion. Austen G. Fox and Charles A. Gardiner, opposed.

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