Page images
PDF
EPUB

partment. October 11, 1907.) Action by Ludis- LUZERNE CHEMICAL CO., Appellant, v. ka H. Larsen, as administratrix, etc., against KENNEY et al., Respondents. (Supreme Court, the United States Mortgage & Trust Company. Appellate Division, Third Department. NovemNo opinion. Motion for leave to appeal to the ber 20, 1907.) Action by the Luzerne Chemical Court of Appeals denied, without costs.

Company against Edward Kenney and others.

PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with LAWRENCE BROS., Inc., v. SCHIFF et al.

costs. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second De

October 4, 1907.) partment.

KELLOGG, J., dissents. COCHRANE, J.,

Action by the Lawrence Brothers, incorporated, against Mac- not sitting. kenzie Schiff and another. No opinion. Order affirmed on argument, with $10 costs and disbursements.

MA AS, Respondent, V. BROOKLYN HEIGHTS R. CO., Appellant. (Supreme

Court, Appellate Division, Second Department. LIEBMANN V. LIEBMANN et al. (Su

October 4, 1907.) Action by John W. Maas preme Court, Appellate Division, First Depart against the Brooklyn Heights Railroad Comment. November 8, 1907.) Action by Joseph pany. No opinion. Judgment of the Municipal Liebmann, as sole surviving executor, etc.,

Court unanimously affirmed, with costs. against Henry L. Liebmann, impleaded with others.

In re McCABE'S WILL. (Supreme Court, No opinion. Motion denied. Order

Appellate Division, Second Department. Oc filed.

tober 18, 1907.) In the matter of the probate of the last will and testament of Mary McCabe,

deceased. No opinion. Decree of the SurroLINGENFELTER, Respondent, v. HALLADAY et al., Appellants. Supreme Court, Aps gate's Court of Kings county affirmed, with

costs. pellate Division, Fourth Department. November 20, 1907.) Action by Thankful Z. Lingenfelter against Joel A. Halladay and others. No opinion. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and DY et al., Appellants. (Supreme Court, Appel

McCULLOUGH, Respondent, V. McCREAdisbursements.

late Division, First Department. November 8,

1907.) Action by Joseph J. McCullough against LOEWENFIELD et al., Appellants, vi Charles McCready and others. J. T. Ryan, for SCHROEDER, Respondent. (Supreme Court, appellants. W. F. Clare, for respondent. No Appellate Division, First Department. October opinion. Determination (52 Misc. Rep. 542, 102 25, 1907.) Action by Pincus Loewenfield and N. Y. Supp. 633) affirmed, with costs, with leave another against Wilhelmina Schroeder. A. to defendants to withdraw demurrer and to Pfeiffer, for appellants. T. F. Keogh, for re- answer, on payment of costs in this court and spondent. No opinion. Order modified, by in the court below. Order filed. striking out paragraph 3 thereof, and, as modified, affirmed, without costs. Order filed.

McKNIGHT, Respondent, v. CITY OF NEW

YORK, Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate LOEWER, Appellant, V. JOHNSON, Re- Division, First Department. October 25, 1907.) spondent. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Action by James McKnight, an infant, against Second Department. October 4, 1907.) Action the city of New York. T. Connoly, for appelby Joseph Loewer against William Johnson. No lant. J. B. Ker, for respondent. opinion. Judgment of the Municipal Court af

PER CURIAM. Judgment and order reversfirmed, with costs.

ed, and new trial ordered, with costs to appel

lant to abide event, unless plaintiff stipulates LONDINO, Respondent, V. BELSITO, Ap- event judgment, as so modified, and order, af

to reduce verdict to $1,500 and costs, in which pellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, firmed, without costs of appeal.' Settle order on Second Department October 4, 1907.) Action notice. by William Londino against Amelia Belsito. No opinion. Judgment affirmed, with costs.

CLARKE and HOUGHTON, JJ., dissent,

and vote for reversal. LOUNSBERY, Respondent, v. MILLER et McLACHLIN, Appellant, v. VILLAGE OF al., Appellants. (Supreme Court, Appellate Di: WHITEHALL, Respondent. (Supreme Court, vision, First Department. October 25, 1907.) | Appellate Division, Third Department. SepAction by Henry H. F. Lounsbery against Marytember 26, 1907.). Action by Thomas S. McF. Miller and another. J. J. Cunneen, for ap- Lachlin against the village of Whitehall. No pellants. E. D. Eddy, for res lent. No opin- opinion. Judgment unanimously affirmed, with ion. Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. costs. See 99 N. Y. Supp. 721. Order filed.

MCLAUGHLIN, Respondent, v. SYRACUSE LUSK, Respondent, V. LEE et al., Appel- RAPID TRANSIT RY, CO., Appellant. (Sulants. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, preme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth DeFourth Department. October 16, 1907.) Ac-partment. November 13, 1907.) Action by tion by Fred Lusk against Fred Lee and an- John McLaughlin against the Syracuse Rapid other. No opinion. Motion denied, without Transit Railway Company. No opinion. Judg. costs.

ment and order affirmed, with costs.

and 140 New York State Reporter MCLAUGHLIN, Respondent, v. WINTJEN, MANDEL, Respondent, v. MANSON et al., Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Appellants. (Supreme Court, Appellate Divi Second Department. October 11, 1907.) Ac- sion, Second Department. October 11, 1907.) tion by Joseph A. McLaughlin against Henry Action by Elias Mandel against Morris Manson G. Wintjen. "No opinion. Judgment of the Mu- and another. No opinion. Judgment of the nicipal Court affirmed, with costs.

Municipal Court affirmed, with costs. McMAIL, Respondent, v. POLIZIO, Appel

MANNING, Appellant, v. ROTHSTEIN, Relant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Sec-spondent. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, ond Department. October 11, 1907.) Action Fourth Department. September 25, 1907.) Ac by Sylvester McMail, an infant, by James Mc- tion by Julius Manning against A. Jacob RothMail, his guardian ad litem, against Dominio stein. No opinion, Motion for reargument dePolizio. No opinion. Judgment and order unan- nied, without costs. imously affirmed, with costs.

In re MANSKE. (Supreme Court, Appellate MCNAIR, Respondent, v. SALIT et al., Ap- 1907.) In the matter of the judicial settlement

October 18,

Division, Second Department pellants. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, of the account of Josephine G. Manske, formerSecond Department. October 4, 1907.) Action ly Josephine Gunther, as administratrix, etc., of by Mary II. McNair against Michael J. Salit Ötto Gunther, deceased. and another. No opinion. Order affirmed, with

PER CURIAM. $10 costs and disbursements.

Decree of the Surrogate's

Court of Kings county modified, by reducing the MCNAIR, Respondent, v. ŞALIT et al., Ap- $5,000, and by relieving the contestant of the

compensation of Mr. Graves, the counsel, to pellants. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, costs of the reference and charging it to the esSecond Department. October 4. 1907.) , Action tate, and, as thus modified, affirmed, without by Mary H. McNair against Michael J. Salit

costs. and another. No opinion. Order, in so far as appealed from, affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements.

MARIS, Appellant, v. SWANN, Respondent.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First De MeNULTY, Respondent, v. LUDWIG & CO., lena Maris against Mark E.' Swann.

partment. November 8, 1907.) Action by El. Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Bostwick, for appellant. J. W. Brainsby, for

C. F. Second Department. October 11, 1907.) Action by Bernard McNulty against Ludwig & Co. No with costs. Order filed.

respondent. No opinion, Judgment affirmed, opinion. Judgment and order affirmed by default, with costs.

MARKHAM, Appellant, v. WALSH, Re MCNULTY, Respondent, v. MeNULTY, Ap- Fourth Department. November 13, 1907.) de

spondent. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, pellant. (Supreme Court. Appellate Division, tion by Homer C. Markham against John W. First Department. November 8, 1907.) Action Walsh. by Mary E. McNulty against Patrick J. McNulty. °W. J. Walsh, for appellant. J. A. Mc- and Justice Court reversed, with costs in this

PER CURIAM. Judgment of County Court Elhinny, for respondent. No opinion. affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. Or court and the courts below. Held, that the deder filed.

fense of untenantableness of the premises was entirely unproved, and the jury having betin

permitted to consider the evidence as to the MAHONEY, Respondent, V. CAYUGA condition of the premises in question, which eriLAKE CEMENT CO., Appellant. (Supreme dence was admitted over the plaintiff's objection Court, Appellate Division, Third Department. and exception, we are unable to determine November 13, 1907.) Action by John Mahoney that the verdict rendered in favor of the defendagainst the Cayuga Lake Cement Company. ant was not influenced or controlled thereby. No opinion. Order that case be certified to Fourth department on account of disagreement In re MARLOR'S WILL. (Supreme Court, of justices.

Appellate Division, Second Department.

tober 18, 1907.). In the matter of the probate lant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Sec- fied (166 N. Y. Supp. 131), so as to provide for MALANE, Respondent, v. IIAWKES, Appel- of the last will and testament of Jane Ana

Order modiond Department. October 11, 1907.) by Ella P. Malane against Mary C. Hawkes. the submission of the questions to a jury. Settle No opinion. Motion to open default denied, and order before HIRSCHBERG, P. J. appeal dismissed, with costs.

MALTBY, Respondent, v. CITY OF NEW MARTINE, Appellant, v. HUDSON VALYORK, Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate LEY RY. CO., Respondent. (Supreme Court, Division, Second Department. October 11, Appellate Division, Third Department. No1907.) "Action by Eva L. Maltby against the vember 13, 1907.) Action by Mary E. Martine, city of New York. No opinion. Judgment and as administratrix, etc., of Godfrey R. Martine, order unanimously affirmed, with costs.

deceased, against the Hudson Valley Railway

V.

V.

Company. Vo opinion. Judgment unanimous- v. ROTHSCHILD. HYLAND WOOD. lg affirmed, with costs.

BURY INST. BRYANT V. CARR. HORS

FORD v. MANVILLE. HOROWITZ MASON, Respondent, V. THOMPSON, Ap. BROADS MFG. CO. DEMPSEY v. RUTpellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, LAND MARBLE CO. HIRSCHFIELD V. Second Department. October 23, 1907.) AC- HANLEY & CO. KEAR v. NEW YORK tion by Thomas F. Mason against Evelyn E. CITY RY. CO. RICHTER v. COLON. ALTThompson.

HAUSE v. BANKERS' TRUST CO. DAMPER CURIAM. Judgment and order affirm. SKY v. WELTFISCH. (Supreme Court, Aped, with costs.

pellate Division, First Department. October

L.

18, 1907.) Actions by Herbert WOODWARD and JENKS, JJ., dissent.

Miles

against James Barton, by Robert A. Dobyns MAURER v. FRIEDMAX et al. (Supreme against the Commonwealth Trust Company, by Court, Appellate Division, First Departinent. William M. Bauchelle against Jacob RothsNovember 8, 1907.) Action by Mary E. Mau: child, by Mary E. Hyland against the Woodrer against Samuel Friedman and others. No bury Institution, by J. Wilson Bryant against opinion. Motion denied, with $10 costs. Or

Austin Carr, by Elizabeth A. Horsford against

Hiram der tiled.

D. Manville, by Morris Horowitz against the Broads Manufacturing Company,

by John M. Dempsey against the Rutland Mar. MAYER, Respondent, v. DAVIS et al., Ap- ble Company, by Morris Hirschfield against pellants. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Hanley & Company, by Henry Kear against Second Department, October 18, 1907.) AC" the New York City Railway Company, by tion by Florence E. Mayer against Marian John Richter against George Colon, by Walter Davis and others. No opinion. Motion for re

Altbause against the Bankers' Trust Company, argument granted, and case set down for Mon- and by Annie Damsky against Abraham S. day, October 21, 1907. See 103 N. Y. Supp. Weltfisch. No. opinions. Applications in each 943, 946.

case denied, with $10 costs. Orders signed.

MILGRIM et al., Appellants, v. FEUER, MAYER, Respondent, v. GOTTLIEB, Ap. Respondent. (Supreme Court, Appellate Divipellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, sion, Second Department. October 23, 1907.) First Department. October 25, 1907.) Action Action by Max Milgrim and another against by Rosalynde A. "Mayer against William B. William Feuer. No opinion. Judgment of the Gottlieb. G. C. Weil, for appellant. N. G. Municipal Court affirmed with costs. Goldberger, for respondent. No opinion. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. Or- MILLRING, Appellant, v. KEITSCH et al., der filed.

Respondents. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department. November 13,

1907.) Action by William J. Millring against MEANY, Respondent, v. HURWITZ. Ap- Mary Keitsch and another. No opinion. Judgpellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, ment and order aflirmed, with costs. Second Department. October 11, 1907.) Асtion by John Meany against Wulf Hurwitz. MINCH V. NEW YORK EVENING JOURNo opinion. Judgment of the Municipal Court NAL et al. (Supreme Court, Appellate Divitinanimously affirmed, with costs. See 100 N. sion, First Department. November 8, 1907.) Y. Supp. 975.

Action by Michael Minch against the New York

Evening Journal and others. No opinion. In re MEISZNER'S ESTATE. (Supreme

Judgment affirmed,' with costs, with leave to Court, Appellate Division, First Department. defendants to withdraw demurrer and to anOctober 25, 1907.) In the matter of the estate

swer, on payment of costs in this court and of George Meiszner, deceased. Yo opinion.

in the court below. Order filed. Decree affirmed, with costs. Order filed.

MISCH, Respondent, NEW YORK MERRITT. Appellant, v. PIERCE, Respond- EVENING JOURNAL et al., Appellants. ent. (Supreme Court, Appellate

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First De

Division, Third Department.

Action

November 8, 1907.)
November 13, 1907.) Ac partment.

by tion by Madison Merritt against 'John Pierce. Margaret Minch against the New York EvenNo, opinion. Judgment unanimously aflirmed, ing Journal and another. M. De Witt, for apwith costs.

pellants. J. G. Pheil, for respondent. No opinion. Judgment affirmed, with costs, with

leave to defendants to withdraw demurrer and M. HARTLEY CO., Appellant, v. EVANS, to answer on payment of costs in this Respondent, et al. (Supreme Court, Appellate and in the court below. Order filed. Division, First Department. November 22, 1907.) Action by the M. Hartley Company MINSKY V. JACOBS._(Supreme Court, Apagainst Thomas E. Evans, impleaded. W. F. pellate Division, First Department. October Goldbeck, for appellant. R. L. Moffett, for re- 18, 1907.) Action by Louis Minsky against spondent. No opinion. Judgment and order J. Randolph Jacobs. No opinion. Motion deaffirmed, with costs. Order filed.

nied, on payment of $10 costs, and on condition

that appellant have appeal ready for argument MILES v. BARTON. DOBYNS v. COM. on the first motion day of the December term. MONWEALTH TRUST CO. BAUCHELLE | Order filed.

106 N.Y.S.-72

[ocr errors]

ur

[ocr errors]

and 140 New York State Reporter MINSKY v. JACOBS. (Supreme Court, Ap- stay against Patrick J. Carlin and others. No pellate Division. First Department. November opinion. Motion denied, on condition that the 15, 1907.) Action by Louis Minsky against J. appellant have his case ready for argument at Randolph Jacobs. No opinion. Motion de- the December term. Order filed. nied, with $10 costs. Order filed.

MULVEY, Respondent, V. FUCHS, AppelMOEST, Appellant, CONTINENTAL lant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Ser CASUALTY CO., Respondent. (Supreme ond Department. October 18, 1907.) Action by Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department. Peter Mulvey against Elenora Fuchs. No opinNovember 20, 1907.) Action by Mary Moestion. Judgment of the Municipal Court affirmagainst the Continental Casualty Company: ed, with costs. No opinion. Judgment (55 Misc. Rep. 128, 104 N. Y. Supp. 553) affirmed with costs.

No notice.

MUNRO, Respondent, V. BROOKLYN MONTROSE, Respondent, v. POTTERTON HEIGHTS R. CO., Appellant. (Supreme Court, et al., Appellants. (Supreme Court, Appellate Appellate Division, Second Department. OctoDivision, Second Department. October 4,

ber 11, 1907.) Action by Rilla Munro against 1907.) Action by Frederick Montrose, an in: | the Brooklyn Heights Railroad Company. Xo fant, by George Montrose, his guardian ad opinion. Motion for leave to appeal to the litem, against John H. Potterton and another, Court of Appeals granted. Settle order on copartners, etc., impleaded with others. opinion. Judgment and order unanimously affirmed, with costs.

MURRAY, Respondent, NEW YORK

CITY RY. CO., Appellant. (Supreme Court, MORAN, Appellant, v. BOARD OF EDU- Appellate Division, Second Department. Octo CATION OF NEW YORK, Respondent. (Su-ber 15, 1907.) Action by Margaret Murray preme Court, Appellate Division,. First De against the New York City Railway Company. partment. November 8, 1907.) Action by Kate No opinion. Motion granted, with costs. L. Moran against the board of education of New York. H. Thompson, for appellant. T. MURRAY, Respondent, v. NEW YORK Connoly, for respondent. No opinion. Judg-CITY RY. 'Co., Appellant. . (Supreme Court, ment a ffirmed, with costs. Order filed.

Appellate Division, First Department. Novem

ber 8, 1907.) Action by Edward Murray against MORCH, Respondent, y. SMITH, Appellant. the New York City Railway Company. B. H. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Ames, for appellant. N. W. Kerngood, for Department. October 23, 1907.) Action by

respondent. No opinion. Judgment and order Thomas Morch against Elmer P. Smith. No

affirmed, with costs. Order filed. opinion. Judgment and order affirmed, with costs.

MURRAY, Respondent, v. NORTH RIVER ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER CO. et al.,

Appellants. (Supreme Court, Appellate DiviMORGAN, Respondent, v. CITY OF NEW sion, First Department. October 23, 1907.) ACYORK, Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate tion' by 'Ellen E. Murray, as administratrix, Division, Second Department. October 18, against the North River Electric Light & Power 1907.) Action by Terry G. Morgan against the Company and another. C. I. Taylor, for appe). city of New York. No opinion. Judgment af- lants. II. D. Cohen, for respondent. No opinfirmed, with costs.

ion. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and dis

bursements. Order filed. MORRISON V. ANDREWS et al. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department. MUTUAL LIFE INS. CO., Respondent, v. November 15, 1907.) Action by Lewis J. Mor- | RAYMOND et al. Appellants. (Supreme rison against Edward L. Andrews and another. Court, Appellate Division, First Department. No opinion. Motion denied. Order filed.

October 25, 1907.) Action by the Mutual Life

Insurance Company against Charles H. Rar. MOTT, Respondent, v. MOTT, Appellant. mond and another. D. McClure, for appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second De J. McKeen, for respondent. No opinion. Orpartment. October 11, 1907.) Action by Au- der affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. gustus Mott against Katharine S. Mott. No Order filed. opinion. Motion to dismiss appeal denied, with

NAUGHTON, Appellant, v. INTERURBAN

ST. RY. CO., Respondent. (Supreme Court, MOTT et al., Appellants, v. MOTT, Respond. Appellate Division, First Department. Norem

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Sec- ber 8, 1907.) Action by John Naughton ond Department. October 11, 1907.) Action against the Interurban Street Railway Com

O. H. Droege, for appellant. C. F. by Leon A. Mott and others against Emma H. pany. Mott. No opinion. Motion to resettle order Brown, for respondent. No opinion. Judgment granted, without costs.

and order affirmed, with costs. Order filed. MULSTAY v. CARLIN et al. (Supreme NEALE, Respondent, v. WALTER, AppelCourt, Appellate Division, First Department. lant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, SecOctober 18, 1907.) Action by Eugene J. Mul-I ond Department. October 4 1907.) Action by

costs.

ent.

Isabella Neale against John Walter. Max O'LEARY, Respondent, v. HOWELL, AppelSchleimer, for appellant. Frederick W. Block, lant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Secfor respondent. No opinion. Order reversed, ond Department. October 4, 1907.) Action by with $10 costs and disbursements, and motion John D. O'Leary against Eugene B. Howell, as to place the case on the equity calendar grant-receiver of the Long Island Real Estate Exed; the action being for the removal of a cloud change & Investment Company. No opinion. on title, and not for ejectment.

Judgment of the County Court of Kings county

unanimously affirmed, with costs. NEW YORK & QUEENS ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER Cð., Appellant, v. CAR OLSEN V. ROYAL CO. (Supreme Court, PENTER et al., Respondents. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department. NovemAppellate Division, Second Department. October 15, 1907.) Action by Anna Olsen against ber 11, 1907.) Action by the New York & the Royal Company, etc. No opinion. Motion Queens Electric Light & Power Company granted, with $10 costs. Order filed. against John R. Carpenter and others. No opinion. Motion denied, with costs.

ONYAN, Appellant, v. BURNS et al., Re

spondents. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, NICHOLAS LORD et al. (Supreme Fourth Department. October 9, 1907.) Action Court, Appellate Division, First Department. by Thomas Onyan against James Burns and October 18, 1907.) Action by George S. Nich-others. No opinion. Judgment and order afolas against Franklin B. Lord and others. No firmed, with costs. opinion. Judgment affirmed, with costs. Order filed.

In re ORR et al. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department. November 8, 1907.)

In the matter of Alexander E. Orr and others. In re NORTHAM. DUTCHESS INS. CO., No opinion. Application granted. Appellant, V. NORTHAM et al., Respondents. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth De OSBORN V. CARDEZA et al. (Supreme partment. November 20, 1907.) In the matter Court, Appellate Division, Second Department. of the general assignment for the benefit of October 4, 1907.) Action by Ellen C. Osborn creditors of William G. Northam to Lewis N. against Howard J. M. Cardeza and others. No Northam. Action by the Dutchess Insurance opinion. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and Company against Lewis N. Northam, assignee, disbursements. and others. PER CURIAM. Order reversed, with $10

OSBORNE, Respondent, V. MCARTHURS costs and disbursements, and motion granted, BROS. CO., Appellant. (Supreme Court, Apwithout costs. Held, that in the circumstances pellate Division, First Department. November disclosed by the record in this case it was er: 18, 1907.) Action by Clarence J. Osborne against ror for the court to refuse, on the ground of the McArthurs Bros. Company. J. M. Goodale, laches, to open the decree.

for appellant. H. B. Goodstein, for respondent. KRUSE and ROBSON, JJ., dissent.

PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with

costs, with leave to defendant to withdraw deNORTON, Respondent, v. ITHACA ST. RY.

murrer and to answer, on payment of costs in CO. et al., Appellants. (Supreme Court, Ap

this court and in the court below. Order filed. pellate Division, Third Department. November

SCOTT, J., dissents. 13, 1907.) Action by Ella Norton against the Ithaca Street Railway Company and another.

PAGE, Appellant, v. DEMPSEY, Respondent. PER CURIAM. Judgment and order affirm- (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Deed, with costs.

partment, October 25, 1907.) Action by CorneKELLOGG, J., dissents.

lia B. Page against James Dempsey. W. F.

Clare, for appellant. T. M. Tyng, for respondNOURSE. Appellant, v. LEXINGTON ent. DIME SAVINGS & LOAN ASS'N et al., Re PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with spondents. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, costs. Order filed. Fourth Department. November 13, 1907.) CLARKE and HOUGHTON, JJ., dissent. Claim of Oliver W. Nourse against the Lexing. ton Dime Savings & Loan Association and an PARKER, Appellant, ALTONWOOD other.

PARK CO. OF NEW YORK et al., RespondPER CURIAM. Order affirmed, with $10 ents. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Seccosts and disbursements.

ond Department. October 4, 1907.) Action by KRUSE, J., dissents.

K. Webber Parker, suing in her own behalf, against the Altonwood Park Company of New

York and others. OGRADY, Appellant, v. McDONOUGH. Re-firmed, with costs.

No opinion. Judgment afspondent. (Supreme Court. Appellate Division, Second Department. October 11, 1907.) Action by Cornelius E. O'Grady against Patrick YORK, Appellant. (Actions 1, 2, 3 and 5.)

PATERNO, Respondent, v. CITY OF NEW H. McDonough.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second DePER CURIAM. Order aflirmed, with $10 partment. October 15, 1907.). Actions by Frank costs and disbursements.

Paterno against the city of New York. No HOOKER and RICH, JJ., dissent.

opinion. Motions to dismiss appeals denied.

V.

« PreviousContinue »