MEMORANDA OF CAUSES DECIDED DURING THE PERIOD EMBRACED IN THIS VOLUME. HOLMES, BOOTH & HAYDENS, Respondent, v. EBERHARD FABER, Appellant. CHARLES LEONARD et al., Respondents, v. SAME, Appellant. Holmes, Booth & Haydens v. Faber, 1 App. Div. 631, affirmed; Leonard v. Faber, 1 App. Div. 632, affirmed. (Argued June 8, 1896; decided October 6, 1896.) APPEALS from orders of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered February 14, 1896, and from interlocutory judgments of the Supreme Court, entered February 17, 1896, which affirmed interlocutory judgments of the Court of Common Pleas for the city and county of New York in favor of plaintiffs overruling demurrers to the complaints. Upon certificates of the Appellate Division, presenting the same question of law as that presented in Bank of Metropolis v. Faber (ante, p. 200). B. F. Tracy for appellant. D. M. Porter for respondents. Orders affirmed, with costs, and the question answered in the affirmative, with leave to the defendants to answer within twenty days upon payment of costs. All concur. In the Matter of the Examination of VERONICA LYNCH, Matter of Lynch, 83 Hun, 462, affirmed. (Argued June 9, 1896; decided October 6, 1896.) APPEAL from order of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the fifth judicial department, made October 2, 1894, which reversed an order of the county judge of Monroe county, directing the judgment debtor to pay to the sheriff the amount of the judgment and costs, or be committed to jail. Myron T. Bly for appellant. George W. Thomas for respondent. Order affirmed on opinion below, with costs. Concur, GRAY, O'BRIEN, BARTLETT, MARTIN, JJ.; not sitting, HAIGHT, J.; not voting, VANN, J. ANDREW J. ROGERS, Appellant, v. ELIZABETH PATTERSON et al., Rogers v. Patterson, 79 Hun, 483, affirmed. (Argued June 11, 1896; decided October 6, 1896.) APPEAL from final judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered September 20, 1894, and from an order and interlocutory judg ment of the General Term, entered July 30, 1894, and August 8, 1894, respectively, which sustained demurrers to the complaint and reversed an interlocutory judgment of the court at Special Term overruling the demurrers. George M. Baker for appellant. Charles Fox for respondents. Judgment affirmed on opinion below, with leave to plaintiff to amend his complaint within twenty days upon payment of costs. All concur. THOMAS MADDOCK, Respondent, . HENRY A. ROOT, Appellant. Maddock v. Root, 72 Hun, 98, affirmed. v. (Argued June 11, 1896; decided October 6, 1896.) APPEAL from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered upon an order made October 23, 1893, which affirmed a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict, and also affirmed an order denying a motion for a new trial. Thomas P. Wickes for appellant. A. II. Atterbury for respondent. Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion. GEORGE HAYES, Respondent, . LIUBOMIER R. MESTANIZ, Appellant. Hayes v. Mestaniz, 9 Misc. Rep. 705, affirmed. (Argued June 15, 1896; decided October 6, 1896.) APPEAL from judgment of the General Term of the Superior Court of the city of New York, entered upon an order made. July 2, 1894, which affirmed a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict directed by the court. D. Solis Ritterband for appellant. Alexander T. Goodwin for respondent. Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion. In the Matter of the Petition of THE BROOKLYN ELEVATED RAILROAD COMPANY to Acquire Title to Real Estate. BROOKLYN ELEVATED RAILROAD COMPANY, Respondent, ". JOHN S. NAGEL et al., Appellants. Brooklyn El. R. R. Co. v. Nagel, 75 Hun, 590, affirmed. (Argued June 15, 1896; decided October 6, 1896.) APPEAL from order of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, made February 16, 1894, which affirmed an order of Special Term appointing commissioners in condemnation proceedings. Raphael J. Moses for appellants. William N. Cohen for respondent. Order affirmed, with costs; no opinion. MOSES HAWKINS, Respondent, v. JOHN G. BEAKES et al., Appellants. Hawkins v. Beakes, 80 Hun, 292, affirmed. (Argued June 15, 1896; decided October 6, 1896.) APPEAL from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, entered upon an order made July 27, 1894, which affirmed a judg ment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a decision of the court on trial at Circuit, a jury having been waived. John L. Wiggins for appellants. Henry Bacon for respondent. Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion. GEORGE W. MARTIN et al., Respondents, v. SAMUEL C. FREED, Appellant. Martin v. Freed, 78 Hun, 614, affirmed. (Argued June 17, 1896; decided October 6, 1896.) APPEAL from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, entered upon an order made May 14, 1894, which affirmed a judgment in favor of plaintiffs entered upon a decision of the court on trial at Circuit, a jury having been waived. Isaac N. Miller for appellant. J. Stewart Ross for respondents. Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion. THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK v. THE ST. NICH- (Decided October 6, 1896.) THIS was a motion to advance an appeal from a judgment for costs and from the order upon which the same was entered, being an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, made April 10, 1896, which affirmed an order of Special Term overruling exceptions to the report of a referee appointed under the statute (2 R. S. 45, § 19, 24 and 25, as amended by chap. 373, Laws of 1862) to determine a controversy between the claimant, D. O. Mills, and the receiver of the St. Nicholas Bank, and confirmed the same. (See People v. American Loan & Trust Co., ante, p. 117.) Motion denied on the ground that this was not an order finally determining a special proceeding within the provision of the Constitution. Such an order is only reviewable here when certified to this court by the Appellate Division. 150b563 156 650 150b563 160 5 |