Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

MCGOWN et al., Appellants, v. BARNUM et al., Respondents. (Court of Appeals of New York. Oct. 27, 1905.) No opinion. Motion for reargument and to amend remittitur denied, without costs. See 182 N. Y. 547, 75 N. E. 155.

MCMAHON, Appellant, V. CRUCIBLE STEEL CO. OF AMERICA, Respondent. (Court of Appeals of New York. Oct. 27, 1905.) No opinion. Motion for reargument denied, with $10 costs. See 182 N. Y. 540, 75 N. E. 1131.

MACKALL et al., Appellants, v. OLCOTT et al., Respondents. (Court of Appeals of New York. Jan. 30, 1906.) Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department (93 App. Div. 282, 87 N. Y. Supp. 757), entered April 19, 1904, reversing a judgment in favor of plaintiffs entered upon a decision of the court on trial at Special Term and granting a new trial. Herbert C. Smyth, Frank Trenholm, and Millard F. Tompkins, for appellants. J. Hampden Dougherty and James MacGregor Smith, for respondents.

PER CURIAM. Order affirmed, and judgment absolute ordered against the appellants on the stipulation, with costs.

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

MCWILLIAMS, Respondent, v. YELLOW PINE 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 Second Judicial Department (102 App. Div. 624, 92 N. Y. Supp. 1133), entered March 9, 1905, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict and an order denying a motion for a new trial Eustace Conway, for appellant. William M. len and James J. Macklin, 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.

MANDA, Appellant, v. ETIENNE, 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 (99 App. Div. 623, 91 N. Y. Supp. 1103), entered December 16, 1904, affirming a judgment in favor of defendant entered upon a verdict directed by the court and an order denying a motion for a new trial. Hector M. Hitchings, for appellant. Henry W. Rudd and McCready Sykes, for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with costs.

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

MAUCH, Respondent, v. SUPREME TRIBE OF BEN HUR, Appellant. (Court of Appeals of New York. Feb. 13, 1906.) Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Fourth Judicial Department (100 App. Div. 49, 91 N. Y. Supp. 367), entered December 20, 1904, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon the report of a referee. P. S. Collins, for appellant. Henry Donnelly, 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.

MERTZ et al., Respondents, v. PRESS et al., Appellants. (Court of Appeals of New York. Feb. 13, 1906,) Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department (99 App. Div. 443, 91 N. Y. Supp. 264), entered January 17, 1905, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiffs entered upon a verdict directed by the court and an order denying a motion for a new trial. Frederic J. Swift, for appellants. Ernest Hall, for respondents.

PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with costs. CULLEN, C. J., and GRAY, O'BRIEN, BARTLETT, WERNER, HISCOCK, and CHASE, JJ., concur.

METCALF, Respondent, v. METCALF, 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 (97 App. Div. 641, 90 N. Y. Supp. 1105), entered October 18, 1904, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict and an order denying a motion for a new trial. H. L. Munson and A. B. Ottaway, for appellant. Charles H. Addington, for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with costs.

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

MEUER, Respondent, v. PHENIX NAT. BANK, Appellant. (Court of Appeals of New York. Oct. 27, 1905.) Appeal from a judg ment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department (94 App. Div. 331, 88 N. Y. Supp. 83), entered May 21, 1904, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict and an order denying a motion for a new trial. Richard F. Goldsborough and McCready Sykes, for appellant. Joel M. Marx and Lawrence Goldberg, for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with

costs.

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

MILLER, Respondent, v. SENECA RIVER POWER CO. et al., Appellants. (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 (94 App. Div. 609, 87 N. Y. Supp. 1141), entered April 7, 1904, which affirmed a judgment of the Onondaga County Court affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a decision of the Municipal Court of the city of Syracuse. Jerome L. Cheney and John B. Tuck, for appellants. Eugene M. White, for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with

costs.

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

MILLER, Respondent, v. SENECA RIVER POWER CO., Appellant. (Court of Appeals of New York. March 13, 1906.) Appeal from a

judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Fourth Judicial Department (102 App. Div. 619, 92 N. Y. Supp. 1134), entered March 7, 1905, modifying, and affirming as modified, a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon the report of a referee. Je rome L. Cheney and John B. Tuck, for appellant. E. M. White, for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with costs.

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

MOORE, Respondent, v. HOYT et al., Appellants. (Court of Appeals of New York. Feb. 13, 1906.) Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Third Judicial Department (95 App. Div. 620, 88 N. Y. Supp. 1110), entered June 24, 1904, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon the report of a referee. Richard L. Hand and Robert Dornburgh, for appellants. J. Sanford Potter, for respondent. PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with

costs.

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

In re MOSHER'S ESTATE. (Court of Appeals of New York. Jan. 16, 1906.) Motion to dismiss an appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department (103 App. Div. 459, 93 N. Y. Supp. 123), entered May 3, 1905, reversing a judgment in favor of appellant herein entered upon the report of a referee and directing a new trial before another referee. The motion was made upon the ground that the order of the Appellate Division herein was not appealable under section 191 of the Code of Civil Procedure. M. J. Earley, for the motion. George W. McKenzie, opposed.

PER CURIAM. Motion denied, with $10 costs. If the judgment on the report of the referee was reversed by the Appellate Division on questions of fact, as claimed by the respond-ent, which claim is apparently justified by his citations from the opinion of the court, the order fails to show it, and under section 1338 of the Code of Civil Procedure it must be presumed that the reversal was not granted for - such errors, despite anything that may appear in the opinion.

MOSKOWITZ, Appellant, v. BROOKLYN HEIGHTS R. CO., Respondent. (Court of Appeals of New York. Nov. 21, 1905.) Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division_of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department (89 App. Div. 425, 85 N. Y. Supp. 960), entered January 5, 1904, affirming a judgment in favor of defendant entered upon a dismissal of the complaint by the court at a "Trial Term. Robert H. Roy, for appellant. I. R. Oeland and George R. Yeomans, for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with costs.

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

con

MOTT, Respondent, v. EDWARDS 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 Fourth Judicial Department (98 App. Div. 511, 90 N. Y. Supp 303), entered November 28,

1904, which affirmed a judgment of the Onondaga County Court affirming a judgment of the Municipal Court of the City of Syracuse in favor of plaintiff. E. W. Cregg, for appellants. C. W. Darling, 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.

MURPHY, Respondent, v. CUFF, 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. 513, 91 N. Y. Supp. 1104), entered January 30, 1905, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict and an order denying a motion for a new trial. John N. Carlisle, for appellant. F. B. Pitcher and George A. Lawyer, for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with costs.

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

MURPHY, 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. 93, 91 N. Y. Supp. 582), entered January 12, 1905, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon the report of a referee. Thomas Hogan, for appellant. William F. Hodge, 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.

MUTUAL LOAN ASS'N, Respondent, LESSER et al., Appellants (two cases). (Court of Appeals of New York. Jan. 9, 1906.) Appeals from judgments of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department (94 App. Div. 619, 88 N. Y. Supp. 1110), entered May 16, 1904, affirming judgments in favor of plaintiff entered upon verdicts and orders denying motions for new trials. Edward W. S. Johnston, Arthur Furber, and Abraham A. Joseph, for appellants. Franklin Pierce, for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Judgments affirmed, with costs.

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

MYERS, Appellant, v. HOBSON et al., Respondents. (Court of Appeals of New York. Nov. 21, 1905.) Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Fourth Judicial Department (86 App. Div. 629, 83 N. Y. Supp. 1112), entered July 7, 1903, reversing a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a decision of the court on trial at Special Term and granting a new trial. Walter H. Knapp, for appellant. George L. Bachman, for respondents.

PER CURIAM. Order affirmed, and judgment absolute ordered for defendants on the stipulation, with costs.

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

NATIONAL CONTRACTING CO., Respondent, v. HUDSON RIVER WATER POWER CO., Appellant. (Court of Appeals of New York. March 6, 1906.) Motion to amend remittitur. See 170 N. Y. 439, 63 N. E. 450.

PER CURIAM. Motion granted, so far as to give the plaintiff the right to apply at Special Term for the withdrawal of the demurrer to the third defense set up in the answer upon such terms and conditions as the Supreme Court may impose.

NEWTON, Respondent, v. NEW YORK CENT. & H. R. R. CO., Appellant. (Court of Appeals of New York. Jan. 9, 1906.) Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Third Judicial Department (96 App. Div. 81, 89 N. Y. Supp. 23), entered July 11, 1904, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict and an order denying a motion for a new trial. A. H. Cowie, for appellant. William Townsend, for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with costs.

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

NIEWENHOUS, Respondent, V. NEW YORK & H. R. CO. et al., Appellants. (Court of Appeals of New York. Nov. 28, 1905.) No opinion. Motion for reargument denied, with $10 costs. See 177 N. Y. 566, 69 N. E. 1128.

NORTHERN ELEVATOR CO., Limited, Appellant, v. LEHIGH VALLEY 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 Fourth Judicial Department (98 App. Div. 635, 90 N. Y. Supp. 1107), entered December 8, 1904, affirming a judgment in favor of defendant entered upon a verdict directed by the court and an order denying a motion for a new trial. J. H. Metcalf, for appellant. James McCormick Mitchell and Martin Carey, 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.

PARDINGTON, Appellant, v. ABRAHAM et al., Respondents. (Court of Appeals of New York. Jan. 9, 1906.) Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department (93 App. Div. 359, 87 N. Y. Supp. 670), entered April 29, 1904. which reversed a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict and an order denying a motion for a new trial and granted a new trial. George G. Reynolds and F. Reynolds, for appellant. George Gordon Battle and Frederick E. Fishel, for respondents.

PER CURIAM. Order affirmed, and judgment absolute ordered for defendants on the stipulation, with costs, on opinion below.

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

[blocks in formation]

an order denying a motion for a new trial. Julian G. Roberts and Albert G. Milbank, for appellant. Augustus J. Koehler, for respondent. PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with costs.

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

PEOPLE, Respondent, v. BARTELS, Appellant. (Court of Appeals of New York. March 13, 1906.) Motion to dismiss an appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Fourth Judicial Department (110 App. Div. 96 N. Y. Supp. 1139), entered December 6, 1905, which affirmed an order of Special Term denying a motion for a change of venue. The motion was made upon the ground that the appeal was unauthorized. Robert J. Burritt, for the motion. William A. Cowie, opposed.

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

PEOPLE, Respondent, v. INGHAM, 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 (107 App. Div. 41, 94 N. Y. Supp. 733), entered August 4, 1905, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a decision of the court at a Trial Term without a jury. Myron G. Bronner, for appellant. Julius M. Mayer, Atty. Gen. (Eugene E. Sheldon, of counsel), for the People.

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

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

PEOPLE, Respondent, v. MOTOLA, Appellant. (Court of Appeals of New York, Jan. 16, 1906.) Motion to dismiss an appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department (103 App. Div. 610, 93 N. Y. Supp. 1142), entered April 28, 1905, which affirmed a judgment of the Court of Special Sessions of the City of New York convicting the defendant of a misdemeanor. The motion was made upon the grounds that the appellant had failed to file the return on appeal and had taken no steps to prosecute_the appeal since the service of notice thereof. William Travers Jerome, Dist. Atty. (Howard S. Gans, of counsel), for the motion.

PER CURIAM. Motion granted.

PEOPLE, Respondent, v. PATRICK, Appellant. (Court of Appeals of New York. Nov. 28, 1905.)

PER CURIAM. Motion to amend remittitur, by inserting therein a recital that upon the appeal to the Court of Appeals the defendant challenged his conviction for murder as being in violation of certain provisions of the federal Constitution, and that by its decision the said court overruled such_contention, denied. See 182 N. Y. 131, 74 N. E. 843.

PEOPLE, Respondent, v. SEELEY, Appellant. (Court of Appeals of New York. Dec. 12, 1905.) Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Third Judicial Department (105 App. Div. 149, 93 N. Y. Supp. 982), entered May 25, 1905, which affirmed a judgment of the Schuyler County Court rendered upon a verdict convicting the defendant of the crime of violating section 31 of the liquor tax law (Laws 1897,

p. 233, c. 312). Lewis E. Mosher, for appellant. Seaman F. Northrup, for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Judgment of conviction affirmed.

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

PEOPLE, Respondent, v. THOMAS, Appellant. (Court of Appeals of New York. Feb. 27, 1906.) Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department (110 App. Div.

96 N. Y. Supp. 1140), entered December 13, 1905, which affirmed a judgment of the Court of Special Sessions in the City of New York convicting the defendant of a misdemeanor in operating an automobile at an unlawful rate of speed. P. J. Rooney and Alfred Lauterbach, for appellant. William Travers Jerome, Dist. Atty. (Robert C. Taylor, of counsel), for the People.

PER CURIAM. Judgment of conviction affirmed.

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

PEOPLE, Respondent, v. TODD, Appellant. (Court of Appeals of New York. Feb. 6, 1906.) Motion to dismiss an appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department (96 App. Div. 636, 89 N. Y. Supp. 1113), entered July 25, 1904, which affirmed a judgment of the Court of General Sessions of the Peace in the County of New York rendered upon a verdict convicting the defendant of the crime of rape in the first degree. The motion was made on the ground that the appellant had failed to file the required return and to prosecute the appeal. William Travers Jerome, Dist. Atty., for the motion.

PER CURIAM. Motion granted.

PEOPLE ex rel. BROWN, Appellant, v. FINLEY et al., Respondents. (Court of Appeals of New York. Jan. 23, 1906.) Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Third Judicial Department (95 App. Div. 619, 88 N. Y. Supp. 1113), entered June 15, 1904, which affirmed an order of Special Term denying an application for a peremptory writ of mandamus to compel the defendants to audit a certain claim of the relator. Edgar T. Brackett and Horace E. McKnight, for appellant. John H. Burke, for respondents.

PER CURIAM. Order affirmed, with costs. CULLEN, C. J., and O'BRIEN, HAIGHT, VANN, WERNER, BARTLETT, and HISCOCK, JJ., concur.

PEOPLE ex rel. BROWN, Appellant, v. GREENE, Police Com'r, Respondent. (Court of Appeals of New York. March 13, 1906.) Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department (106 App. Div. 230, 94 N. Y. Supp. 477), entered July 8, 1905, which confirmed the determination of the defendant in dismissing the relator from the police force of the city of New York. J. Newton Fiero, Louis J. Hamel, and Samuel J. Rawak, for appellant. John J. Delany, Corp. Counsel (James D. Bell, of counsel), for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Order affirmed, with costs. CULLEN, C. J., and O'BRIEN, HAIGHT, VANN, WERNER, and HISCOCK, JJ., concur. BARTLETT, J., not sitting.

PEOPLE ex rel. CHURCHILL, Appellant, V. GREENE, Police Com'r, Respondent. (Court of Appeals of New York. Jan. 23, 1906.) Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department (104 App. Div. 496, 93 N. Y. Supp. 720), entered May 11, 1905, which quashed a writ of certiorari and affirmed the proceedings of the defendant in dismissing the relator from the police department of the city of New York. A. S. Gilbert and Otto A. Rosalsky, for appellant. John J. Delany, Corp. Counsel (Theodore Connoly and Thomas F. Noonan, of counsel), for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Order affirmed, with costs. CULLEN, C. J., and O'BRIEN, HAIGHT, VANN, WERNER, BARTLETT, and HISCOCK, JJ., concur.

PEOPLE ex rel. ERIE R. CO., Appellant, V. BOARD OF RAILROAD COM'RS OF STATE OF NEW YORK et al., Respondents. (Court of Appeals of New York. March 13, 1906.) Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Third Judicial Department (101 App. Div. 251, 91 N. Y. Supp. 977), entered January 19, 1905, which confirmed a determination of the board of railroad commissioners granting to the Binghamton & Southern Railroad Company a certificate of public convenience and necessity pursuant to the provisions of section 59 of the railroad law (Laws 1895, p. 317, c. 545). W. D. Painter, for appellant. Eliot Norton, Alton B. Parker, and Theodore R. Tuthill, for respondent Binghamton & Southern Railroad Company.

PER CURIAM. Order affirmed, with costs. CULLEN, C. J., and O'BRIEN, HAIGHT, VANN, WERNER, BARTLETT, and HISCOCK, JJ., concur.

PEOPLE ex rel. FINLEY, Appellant, v. GREENE, Police Com'r, Respondent. (Court of Appeals of New York. Jan. 30, 1906.) Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department (94 App. Div. 619, 88 N. Y. Supp. 1113), entered May 17, 1904, which affirmed the proceedings of the defendant in reducing the relator from the grade of roundsman to patrolman in the police force of the city of New York. Louis J. Grant and Jacob Rouss, for appellant. John J. Delany, Corp. Counsel (Theodore Connoly and Terence Farley, of counsel), for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Order affirmed, with costs. CULLEN, C. J., and O'BRIEN, HAIGHT, VANN, WERNER, BARTLETT, and HISCOCK, JJ., concur.

PEOPLE ex rel. GREENBERG, Appellant, v. WARDEN OF CITY PRISON OF NEW YORK et al., Respondents. (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 (83 App. Div. 456, 82 N. Y. Supp. 439), entered June 4, 1903, which affirmed an order of Special Term dismissing writs of habeas corpus and certiorari in behalf of relator. The motion was made upon the ground that that no steps had been taken by the appellant to prosecute and bring on for argument the appeal since the service of the notice thereof. William Travers Jerome, Dist. Atty. (Robert S. Johnston, of counsel), for the motion.

PER CURIAM. Motion granted, and appeal dismissed.

PEOPLE ex rel. HALEY, Appellant, v CAHILL, President of Common Council, et al.,

Respondents. (Court of Appeals of New York. Nov. 28, 1905.) No opinion. Motion for reargument denied, with $10 costs. See 181 N. Y. 403, 74 N. E. 422.

PEOPLE ex rel. HAMILTON, Appellant, v. POLICE COM'R OF CITY OF NEW YORK, Respondent. (Court of Appeals of New York. Jan. 16, 1906.) Motion to dismiss an appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Depart ment (100 App. Div. 483, 91 N. Y. Supp. 760), entered January 17, 1905, which reversed an order of Special Term sustaining a writ of habeas corpus, dismissed said writ and directed that the relator be remanded to the custody of the defendant. The motion was made upon the grounds that the relator had not surrendered himself into custody and had failed to file the undertaking on appeal required by the Code of Civil Procedure. William Travers Jerome, Dist. Atty. (Howard S. Gans, of counsel), for the motion. Charles Goldzier, opposed.

PER CURIAM. Motion denied. We think the fact that this defendant avoided the jurisdiction of the court is not a sufficient reason for dismissing his appeal. Whether he should be permitted to argue the appeal until he submits himself to such jurisdiction is another question, to be met and disposed of hereafter.

PEOPLE ex rel. MARKT & STRULLER CO., Appellant, v. MILLER, Comptroller, Respondent. (Court of Appeals of New York. Jan. 23, 1906.) Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Third Judicial Department (105 App. Div. 637, 93 N. Y. Supp. 1143), entered May 18, 1905, which affirmed a determination of the defendant assessing a license fee and franchise tax upon the relator. Edmund L. Cole, for appellant. Julius M. Mayer, Atty. Gen. (Horace McGuire, of counsel), for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Order affirmed, with costs. CULLEN, C. J., and O'BRIEN, HAIGHT, VANN, WERNER, BARTLETT, and HISCOCK, JJ., concur.

PEOPLE ex rel. MOLLER et al., Appellants, v. O'DONNEL et al., Com'rs of Taxes and Assessments, Respondents. (Court of Appeals of New York. Nov. 28, 1905.)

PER CURIAM. Motion to amend remittitur, so as to award costs to appellants in the Court of Appeals and the Appellate Division only, and not costs in the Special Term, granted. See 183 N. Y. 9, 75 N. É. 540.

PEOPLE ex rel. NEW YORK CENT. & H. R. R. CO., Appellant, v. KELSEY, State Comptroller, Respondent. (Court of Appeals of New York. Jan. 23, 1906.) Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Third Judicial Department (109 App. Div. 96 N. Y. Supp. 1141), entered Decem ber 5, 1905, which affirmed a determination of the defendant assessing a franchise tax against the relator for the year ending October 31, 1902. Thomas Emery and Ira A. Place, for appellant. Julius M. Mayer, Atty. Gen. (Horace McGuire, of counsel), for respondent. PER CURIAM. Order affirmed, with costs. CULLEN. C. J., and O'BRIEN, HAIGHT, VANN, WERNER, BARTLETT, and HISCOCK, JJ., concur.

PEOPLE ex rel. NEW YORK CENT. & H. R. R. CO., Appellant, v. KELSEY, State Comptroller, Respondent. (Court of Appeals of New York. Jan. 23, 1906.) Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme

Court in the Third Judicial Department (109 App. Div. 96 N. Y. Supp. 1141), entered December 5, 1905, which affirmed a determination of the defendant assessing a franchise tax against the relator for the year ending October 31, 1903. Thomas Emery and Ira A. Place, for appellant. Julius M. Mayer, Atty. Gen. (Horace McGuire, of counsel), for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Order affirmed, with costs. CULLEN, C. J., and O'BRIEN, HAIGHT, VANN, WERNER, BARTLETT, and HISCOCK, JJ., concur.

PEOPLE ex rel. NEW YORK CENT. & H. R. R. CO., Appellant, v. KELSEY, State Comp. troller, Respondent. (Court of Appeals of New York. Jan. 23, 1906.) Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Third Judicial Department (109 App. Div. 96 N. Y. Supp. 1141), entered December 5, 1905, which affirmed a determination of the defendant assessing a franchise tax against the relator for the year ending October 31, 1904. Thomas Emery and Ira A. Place, for appellant. Julius M. Mayer, Atty. Gen. (Horace McGuire, of counsel), for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Order affirmed, with costs. CULLEN, C. J., and O'BRIEN, HAIGHT, VANN, WERNER, BARTLETT, and HISCOCK, JJ., concur.

PEOPLE ex rel. O'CONNOR, Appellant, v. AHEARN, Borough President, Respondent. (Court of Appeals of New York. Jan. 23, 1906.) Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department (102 App. Div. 615, 92 N. Y. Supp. 1141), entered February 20, 1905, which affirmed an order of Special Term denying an application for a peremptory writ of mandamus to compel the defendant to reinstate the relator in the position of corporation inspector in the bureau of highways in the city of New York. John W. Browne, for appellant. John J. Delany, Corp. Counsel (Theodore Connoly and William B. Crowell, of counsel), for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Appeal dismissed, with costs.

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

PEOPLE ex rel. REAGAN, Appellant, v. PARTRIDGE, Police Com'r, Respondent. (Court of Appeals of New York. March 13, 1906.) Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department (103 App. Div. 609, 93 N. Y. Supp. 1143), entered April 12, 1905, which dismissed a writ of certiorari and affirmed the proceedings of the defendant in dismissing the relator from the police force of the city of New York. Abram I. Elkus, Carlisle J. Gleason, and Percival G. Barnard, for appellant. John J. Delany, Corp. Counsel (Theodore Connoly, Terence Farley, and Thomas F. Noonan, of counsel), for respondent.

HAIGHT, J. The relator was charged with (1) conduct unbecoming an officer; (2) conduct injurious to the public peace; (3) neglect and disobedience of orders under the rules of the police department, particularly numbering the rules claimed to have been disobeyed; (4) neglect of duty; (5) asking and receiving bribes upon the agreement that his action as an officer should be influenced thereby contrary to section 72 of the Penal Code; (6) perjury committed in the Supreme Court, criminal term, in the case of People v. John D. Herlihy. There were specifications accompanying these charges. The trial took place before one of the

« AnteriorContinuar »