Page images
PDF
EPUB

and 140 New York State Reporter PEOPLE v. ACKRON. (Supreme Court, Ap-, state of New York against James O'Brien. No pellate Division, First Department. November opinion. Motion granted. Order filed. 8, 1907.) Proceedings by the people of the state of New York against Charles E. Ackron. PEOPLE v. WADE (Supreme Court, AppelNo opinion. Motion to dismiss appeal denied, late Division, First Department. October 18, upon condition that appellant have his appeal 1907.) Proceedings by the people of the state ready for argument at the December term. Or- of New York against Henry R. Wade. No der filed.

opinion. Motion denied, on condition that ap pellant have his case ready for argument at

the December term. Order filed. PEOPLE, Respondent, v. BRIGGS, Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, PEOPLE v. WEICK. (Supreme Court, ApFourth Department. October 2, 1907.) Pro- pellate Division, First Department. October ceedings by the people of the state of New York 18, 1907.) Proceedings by the people of the against Charles M. Briggs.

state of New York against Margaret Weick. PER CURIAM. Judgment and order affirm- No opinion. Motion granted. Order resettled. ed, with costs. McLENNAN, P. J., dissents.

PEOPLE ex rel. ALLEN, Appellant, 5.

BINGHAM, Com'r, Respondent. (Supreme PEOPLE v. BRYAN et al. (Supreme Court, Court, Appellate Division, First Department. Appellate Division, First Department. October November 8, 1907.) Proceedings by the people 18, 1907.) Proceedings by the people of the of the state of New York, on the relation of state of New York against John Bryan and an- James A. Allen, against Theodore A. Bingham, other. No opinion. Motion granted. Order as commissioner. J. A. Allen, for appellant. filed.

T. Connoly, for respondent. No opinion. Or der affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements

Order filed. PEOPLE, Respondents, v. DI RUZZA, Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Sec- PEOPLE ex rel. FOGARTY . CASSIDY. ond Department. October 4, 1907.) Proceed: (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First De ings by the people of the state of New York partment October 18, 1907.) Proceedings by against Lucca Di Ruzza. No opinion. Judg- the people of the state of New York, on the re ment of conviction, and order of the County lation of Lawrence Fogarty, against Joseph Court of Westchester county denying motion Cassidy. No opinion. Motion denied, with $10 for new trial, affirmed.

costs. Order filed. PEOPLE, Respondent, v. DUNHAM, Appel- PEOPLE ex rel. GAY, Appellant, y. BUTlant. (Supreme CourtAppellate Division, LER, Com'r, Respondent. (Supreme Court, ApThird Department. November 25, 1907.) Pro-pellate Division, First Department. November ceedings by the people of the state of New 22, 1907.) Proceedings by the people of the York against Ansel W. Dunham.

state of New York, on the relation of Harry G. PER CURIAM. Order affirmed.

Gay, against Edmond J. Butler, as commissionSMITH, P. J., not voting. KELLOGG, J., er. A. H. Scoble, for appellant. T. Connoly, dissents, upon the ground that the county judge for respondent. No opinion. Order affirmed, should resettle the case by certifying what ac with $10 costs and disbursements. Order filed. tually took place upon the rendition of the verdict.

PEOPLE ex rel. KELLY, Appellant, Y. HEBBERD, Com'r, Respondent. (Supreme

Court, Appellate Division, First Department PEOPLD, Respondent, v. JONES, Appellant. November 8, 1907.) Proceedings by the people (Supreine Court, Appellate Division, Fourth of the state of New York, on the relation of EdDepartment. November 13, 1907.) Proceedings ward J. Kelly, against Robert W. Hebberd, as by the people of the state of New York against commissioner. H. J. Goldsmith, for appellant. Jane Jones.

T. Connoly, for respondent. No opinion. Or PER CURIAM. Judgment of conviction af- der affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements firmed.

Order filed. KRUSE and ROBSON, JJ., dissent.

PEOPLE ex rel. LOCKWOOD, Appellant, F. PEOPLE, Respondent, v. NEFF, Appellant. BUTLER, Com'r, Respondent. (Supreme Court. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Appellate Division, First Department. NovemDepartment, September 25, 1907.) Proceedings ber 22, 1907.) Proceedings by the people of the by the people of the state of New York against state of New York, on the relation of William John W. Neff. No opinion. Motion for reargu- Lockwood, against Edmond J. Butler, as com ment denied. Motion for leave to appeal to missioner. A. H. Scoble, for appellant. T. the Court of Appeals granted. See 105 N. Y. Connoly, for respondent. No opinion. Order Supp. 559.

affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. Or

der filed. PEOPLE v. O'BRIEN. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department. October PEOPLE ex rel. ROBESCH . PRESI. 18, 1907.) Proceedings by the people of the DENT OF BOROUGH OF QUEENS. (SuCourt, Appellate Division, First Department. FORD, J. If I were permitted to enter the November 8, 1907.) Action by the Prince Line, realm of conjecture I might dismiss this writ. Limited, against the John C. Seager Company. I could, and indeed do, guess that the proceed-L. Ullo, for appellant. J. M. Woolsey, for reings before the magistrate were entirely regular. spondent. No opinion. Order affirmed, with But, owing to the slovenly manner in which the $10 costs and disbursements. Order filed. papers upon which I am asked to remand the relator were prepared, and their meaningless- PUNSKY, Respondent, V. CITY OF NEW ness when scrutinized with that degree of care YORK, Appellant. (Actions 1 and 2.) (Suwhich should always be employed when the per- preme Court, Appellate Division, Second Desonal liberty of any one is concerned, I must partment. October 15, 1907.) Actions by Theosustain the writ and discharge the prisoner. dore Punsky against the city of New York. No

preme Court, Appellate Division, Second De-, Lighting Company. No opinion. Judgment and partment, October 11, 1907.) Proceedings by order affirmed, with costs. the people of the state of New York, on the relation of Charles C. Robesch, against the presi. POUND, Respondent, v. CONVERSE, Appeldent of the borough of Queens. No opinion. lant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, SecMotion to resettle order denied, with costs. ond Department., October 4, 1907.) Action by

Donald A. Pound against Harry L. Converse. PEOPLE ex rel. SCHWARTZ, Appellant, v. No opinion. Judgment of the Municipal Court SMITH, Sheriff, Respondent. (Supreme Court, affirmed, with costs. Appellate Division, Fourth Department. October 19, 1907.) Proceedings by the people of the POWELL, Appellant, V. ROACH, Respondstate of New York, on the relation of Edward ent. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, SecB. Schwartz, against James Smith, sheriff of ond Department. October 18, 1907.) Action by Erie County. No opinion. Order affirmed, with John K. Powell, Jr., against John J. Roach. costs.

No opinion. Judgment of the Municipal Court

affirmed, with costs. PEOPLE ex rel. SPAHN, Appellant, v. BUT- PRAY, Respondent, v. NEW YORK STATE LER, Com'r, Respondent. (Supreme Court, Ap- NAT. BANK AT ALBANY, Appellant. (Supellate Division, First Department. November preme Court, Appellate Division, Third Depart8, 1907.) Proceedings by the people of the state ment. November 13, 1907.) Action by Alice E. of New York, on the relation of Otto J. Spahn, Pray against the New York State National against Edmond J. Butler, as commissioner. E. Bank at Albany. S. Griffing, for appellant. T. Connoly, for re- PER CURIAM. Interlocutory judgment afspondent. No opinion. Order affirmed, with firmed, with costs, with leave to defendant to $10 costs and disbursements. Order filed.

answer, on payment of costs of demurrer and of

this appeal. PEOPLE ex rel. WILCOX, Appellant, V.

SMITH, P. J., dissents. CURTIS, Respondent. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department. October PRAY V. NEW YORK STATE NAT. BANK 4, 1907.) Proceedings by the people of the state AT ALBANY. (Supreme Court, Appellate of New York, on the relation of Franklin A. Division, Third Department. November 27, Wilcox, against William H. Curtis, as clerk of 1907.) 'Action by Alice E. Pray against the arrears of taxes and assessments of the city of New York State National Bank at Albany. No Mt. Vernon. No opinion. Order affirmed, with opinion. Motion denied. $10 costs and disbursements.

PRENTICE, Appellant, V. SOMMER, RePEOPLE ex rel. WILSON

FLYNN, spondent. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Warden. (Supreme Court, Special Term, New Second Department. October 11, 1907.) AcYork County. October 2, 1907.) Habeas cor- tion by Westervelt Prentice against Maurice pus by the people of the state of New York, on Sommer. No opinion. Motion for reargument relation of Mary Wilson, against one Flynn, as denied, with costs. warden of the city prison of the city of New York. Writ granted. Relator discharged. R. PRINCE LINE, Limited, Respondent, v. J. Haire, for relator. Robert S. Johnstone, Asst. JOHN C. SEAGER CO., Appellant. (Supreme Dist. Atty. for respondent.

[ocr errors]

opinion. Motions to dismiss appeals denied. PERRY, Respondent, v. BATES, Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First De- RAFF, Appellant, v. BAER, Respondent. (Supartment. November 22, 1907.) Action by Al- preme Court, Appellate Division, Second Devan W. Perry against Benjamin L. M. Bates. partment. October 18, 1907.) Action by Paul J. B. Stanchfield, for appellant. H. Taylor, Raff against Marie Baer. No opinion. Judgfor respondent. No opinion. Judgment and or- ment of the Municipal Court affirmed, with der affirmed, with costs. Order filed.

costs.

PIRONG, Respondent, v. SYRACUSE LIGHTING CO., Appellant. (Supreme Court, RAHM, Appellant, V. NEW YORK CENT. Appellate Division, Fourth Department. No- & H. R. R. CO., Respondent._(Supreme Court, vember 13, 1907.) Action by Mary E. Pirong, Appellate Division, Fourth Department. Noas administratrix, etc., against the Syracuse | Pember 13, 1907.) Action by Theresa Rahm, as ecutor, etc., and others. No opinions. Motions

and 140 New York State Reporter administratrix, etc., against the New York Cen- | 13, 1907.) In the matter of the judicial settle tral & Hudson River Railroad Company. No ment of the accounts of William A. Richardson, opinion. Order denying plaintiff's motion for a as administrator, etc., of Elizabeth McArthur, new trial upon the minutes of the court affirm- deceased. No opinion. Decree unanimously afed, with costs.

firmed, with costs.

RAIFE, Respondent, v. SWITZER, Appellant RIDER, Appellant, v. BRITTON, Respond(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second De-ent. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth partment.

October 4, 1907.) Action by Philip Department. October 19, 1907.) Action by R. Raife against Andrew Switzer. No opinion. Clinton W. Rider against Margaret Britton. Order setting aside verdict and granting plain- PER CURIAM. Order affirmed, with $10 tiff's motion for a new trial affirmed, with costs.

costs and disbursements. Held that, it appear RANDEL V. FRANK. (Supreme Court, Ap-cause was upon the calendar at the term at

ing by statements in appellant's brief that the pellate Division, First Department. October 18, which the order was granted, the court in the 1907.) Action by Elias Randel against Louis exercise of its discretion had the right to make Frank. No opinion. Motion granted. Settle the order appealed from, independent of the order on notice.

provisions of rule 31 of the general rules of

practice. RANKIN v. BUSH et al. (Supreme Court,

SPRING, J., dissents, upon the authority of Appellate Division, First Department. Novem- Ellensohn v. Keyes, 6 App. Div. 601, 39 N. I. ber 8, 1907.). Action by George C. Rankin, as Supp. 774. receiver, against John J. Bush and others. No opinion. Motion denied, upon payment of $10 costs, and on condition that defendants have In re ROBERTS. (Supreme Court, Appeltheir appeal ready for argument at the Decem- late Division, First Department. June Term. ber term. Order filed.

1907.). In the matter of Frederick R. Roberts.

No opinion. Motion denied, with $10 costs. RAY, Appellant, v. HEARD et al., Respondents. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department. October 2, 1907.) Action by Lot- Respondents. "(Supreme Court, Appellate

Divi

ROBINSON, Appellant, v. KELSO et al., tie c. Ray against Ralph E. Heard and others, sion, Third Department. November 13, 1907.) as executors. No opinion. Judgment affirmed, Action by Susan F. Robinson against Caroline with costs.

Kelso and Edna D. Jones, individually and as

administratrix with the will annexed of the REALTY IRON WORKS V. HENNEY et goods, etc., of John S. Kelso, deceased. al. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First PER CURIAM. Judgment (53 Misc. Rep. Department. November 8, 1907.) Action by 89, 103 N. Y. Supp. 1098) affirmed, with costs. the Realty Iron Works against John Henney, SMITH, P. J., and KELLOGG, J., dissent. impleaded. No opinion. Motion to dismiss appeal granted, without costs. Order filed.

In re ROCHE. BATES et al., Appellants, T. REISS, Respondent, v. BOEHM et al., Ap- Appellate Division, Third Department. Septem

ROCHE et al., Respondents. (Supreme Court. pellants. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department. October 25, 1907.) Action ber 26, 1907.). In the matter of the judicial setby Samuel M. Reiss, as trustee, against Max s. tlement of the accounts of William J. Roche, as Boehm and others. E. Goldmark, for appel- executor of the last will and testament of Henry lants. W. M. Seabury, for respondent." No T. Nason, deceased. Action by Eliza E. Bates opinion. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and and another against William J. Roche, as erdisbursements. Order filed.

denied. See 104 N. Y. Supp. 601, 1138. RHEIMS, Respondent, v. SHULDINER, Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, ROCK, Appellant, V. INTERNATIONAL Second Department. October 11, 1907.) Action PAPER CO., Respondent. (Supreme Court, Apby Cyrus Rheims against David Shuldiner. No pellate Division, Third Department. November opinion. Judgment and order of the Municipal 27, 1907.) Action by Edgar Rock against the Court affirmed, with costs.

International Paper Company.

PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, witb RICHARD DEEVES & SON, Respondent, v. MANHATTAN LIFE INS. CO., Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First De

CHESTER and KELLOGG, JJ., dissent. partment. November 8, 1907.) Action by Richard Deeves & Son against the Manhattan Life ROCKWOOD P. NEW YORK CONTRACTInsurance Company. E. S. Rapallo, for appel- ING CO., NEW HAVEN IMPROVEMENTS. lant. J. Frankenheimer, for respondent. No (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth De opinion. Judgment and order affirmed, with partment. November 13, 1907.) Action by Mar costs. Order filed.

tin D. Rockwood, as administrator, etc., against

the New York Contracting Company, New HarIn re RICHARDSON. (Supreme Court, Ap- en Improvements. No opinion. Motion denied. pellate Division, Third Department. November 'with $10 costs.

costs.

In re RODGERS. (Supreme Court, Appel-Court, Appellate Division, First Department. late Division, Second Department. October 11, October 18, 1907.) Actions by Joseph Rosen1907.) In the matter of the application for the thal against the Empire Brick Company, by removal from office of John Rodgers, a justice John J. Fish against Henrietta Hahn, by George of the peace of the town of Woodbury, Orange Morris against the board of education, and by county, N. Y. No opinion. Application refer- Joseph Beilin against Rosie Wein. No opinred to Mr. N. Deyo Belknap, of Newburgh, N. ions. Applications granted. Order signed. Y., to hear and to report to the court, with his opinion. Order signed.

In re ROSSELL. (Supreme Court, Appel

late Division, Third Department. November ROEHRS, Respondent, v. MANHATTAN 20, 1907.). In the matter of the judicial settleREFRIGERATING CO., Appellant. (Supreme ment of the accounts of Sarah J. Rossell, as Court, Appellate Division, First Department. one of the executors of Elizabeth Gamble, deNovember 22, 1907.) Action by Julius Roehrs ceased, by Isaac S. Rossell and another, as against the Manhattan Refrigerating Company. executors of said Sarah J. Rossell, deceased. W. H. Harris, for appellant. E. S. Hatch, for No opinion. Reargument ordered, and matter respondent. No opinion. Judgment and order referred to Timothy L. Bush, referee, to take affirmed, with costs. Order filed.

further evidence as to the payment of the $2,000

legacy to Mrs. Rossell, and to report such eviROGERS, Respondent, v. FRANKLIN dence to this court. MILLS CO., Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department. October ROSSENBACH, Respondent, v. SUPREME 25, 1907.) Action by Richard J. Rogers against COURT I. O. F., Appellant. (Supreme Court, the Franklin Mills Company. G. S. Scofield, Appellate Division, Fourth Department. Novfor appellant. T. M. Rowlette, for respondent. ember 20, 1907.) Action by Thereso Rossenbach No opinion. Order affirmed, with $10 costs against the Supreme Court of the Independent and disbursements. Order filed.

Order of Foresters. No opinion. Judgment and

order affirmed, with costs. ROONEY, Respondent, v. BROGAN CONST. CO., Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Di- ROWE et al. V. HOROWITZ. (Supreme vision, Second Department. October 18, 1907.) Court, Appellate Division, First Department. Action by Margaret Rooney, as administratrix, November 15, 1907.) Action by Margaret Rowe etc., of John Rooney, deceased, against the Bro- and another against Charlotte Horowitz. No gan Construction Company. No opinion. Judg- opinion. Motion granted, with $10 costs. Orment and order unanimously affirmed, with der filed. costs. See 95 N. Y. Supp. 1; 99 N. Y. Supp. 939.

In re RUPP et al. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department. November 8,

1907.) In the matter of Louis P. Rupp and ROSCOE LUMBER CO., Appellant, v. REY- others. VOLDS et al., Respondents. (Supreme Court, PER CURIAM. Order (106 V. Y. Supp. Appellate Division, Second Department. Octo- | 483) affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. ber 11, 1907.) Action by the Roscoe Lumber Order filed. Company against William H. Reynolds and INGRAHAM and CLARKE, JJ., dissent. another. No opinion. Appeal dismissed, without consideration, for the reason that the rec- RUSSELL, Appellant, v. WALWORTH, Reord fails to show that the case was settled by spondent. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, the justice of the Municipal Court before whom Second Department. October 11, 1907.) Action it was tried, as required by section 318 of the by Edgar A. Russell against George S. WalMunicipal Court act (Laws 1902, p. 1581, c. worth. No opinion. Judgment and order of 580).

the Municipal Court affirmed, with costs.

RUTHENBERG, Respondent, V. COLLINS ROSE et al., Appellants, v. ROSE et al., Re- et al., Appellants. (Supreme Court, Appellate spondents. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Division, Fourth Department. October 2, 1907.) Second Department. October 4, 1907.) Action Action by August W. L. Ruthenberg against by Joseph H. Rose and another against John Newton M. Collins and another. No opinion. B. Rose, individually and as trustee, etc., of Motion for leave to appeal to the Court of ApJohn C. Rose, deceased, and others. No opin- peals denied, with $10 costs and disbursements. ion. Judgment affirmed, with costs. ROSENBERG et al., Respondents, v.

RUYL, Respondent, v. KAHLER, Appellant. FRANKEL et al., Appellants. (Supreme Court, | (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second DeAppellate Division, Second Department. Oc? partment. October 4, 1907.) Action by James tober 11, 1907.). Action by Charles Rosenberg P., Ruyl against William T. H. Kahler. No and another against Rosa Frankel and another. opinion. Judgment of the Municipal Court afNo opinion. Judgment of the Municipal Court firmed, with costs. affirmed by default, with costs.

RYAN, Respondent, v. CENTRAL NEW ROSENTHAL v. EMPIRE BRICK CO. YORK TELEPHONE & TELEGRAPH CO., FISH v. HAHN. MORRIS v. BOARD OF Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, EDUCATION. BEILIN v. WEIN. (Supreme Fourth Department. October 19, 1907.) AC

and 140 New York State Reporter tion by Florence A. Ryan against the Central | ond Department. October 4, 1907.) Action by New York Telephone & Telegraph Company. William Schultz against Cordelia E. Yvelin.

PER CURIAM. Judgment and order affirm- No opinion. Judgment of the County Court of ed, with costs.

Nassau county affirmed, with costs. WILLIAMS, J., dissents.

In re SCOTT'S ESTATE. (Supreme Court, RYAN, Respondent, v. HALLIGAN, Appel ber 8, 1907.) In the matter of the estate of Re

Appellate Division, First Department. Noremlant. Third Department. November 13, 1907.) AC becca B. Scott, deceased. No opinion. Decree

Order filed. tion by Anna F. Ryan against John J. Halligan. affirmed, with costs. executor, etc. No opinion. Judgment and order reversed, and new trial granted, with costs

In re SEA BEACH RY. CO. (Supreme to appellant to abide event, unless the plain-Court, Appellate Division, Second Department tiff stipulates, within 20 days, to reduce the October 4, 1907.) In the matter of the appliverdict to $500, in which case judgment and cation of the Sea Beach Railway Company to order affirmed, without costs.

compel the payment of an award, etc., for open

ing Third avenue from Sixtieth street to the RYAN v. HALLIGAN. (Supreme Court, Ap- Shore Driveway, etc. No opinion. Order afpellate Division, Third Department. November firmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. 27, 1907.) Action by Anna F. Ryan against John J. Halligan, as executor, etc., of Cather- HEIGHTS R. Co., Respondent.

SELLECK, Appellant, v. BROOKLYN ine Clark, deceased. No opinion. Motion de

(Supreme nied.

Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.
October 11, 1907.) Action by Robert R. Sel-

leck against the Brooklyn Heights Railroad RYAN, Respondent, P. PENNSYLVANIA Company. COAL CO., Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appel

PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with late Division, Second Department. October 4,

costs. 1907.) Action by John A. Ryan, as adminis- RICH, J., dissents. trator, etc., of John J. Ryan, deceased, against the Pennsylvania Coal Company. No opinion.

SELLEY et al., Respondent, v. IRISH IN. Judgment and order unanimously affirmed, with DUSTRIAL EXPOSITION & AMUSEMENT costs.

CO., . Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate
Division, First Department. October 25, 1907.)

Action by Edwin J. Selley and another against
SAMMARITANO, Respondent, V. INTER- the Irish Industrial Exposition & Amusement
URBAN ST. RY. CO., Appellant." (Supreme Company. T. M. Tyng, for appellant. L. M.
Court, Appellate Division, First Department. Berkeley, for respondents. No opinion. Order
November 8, 1907.) Action by Vincenzo Sam- affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. Or
maritano against the Interurban Street Railway der filed. See 53 Misc. Rep. 46, 102 X. I.
Company. B. H. Ames, for appellant. c. 0. Supp. 1006.
Maas, for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. Order filed.

SHAPIRO et al., Appellants, v. FRIEDMAN,

Respondent. (Supreme Court, Appellate Divi LAUGHLIN and LAMBERT, JJ., dissent. sion, Second Department. October 4, 1907.)

Action by Abraham Shapiro and another against SCHIEFER, Appellant, V. FREYGANG et Adolph Friedman. No opinion. Judgment of al., Respondents. (Supreme Court, Appellate the Municipal Court affirmed, with costs. Division, First Department. November 8, 1907.) Action by Bertha Schiefer against Minna Frey- SHEEHAN V. MARTIN et al. (Supreme gang and others. L. M. Berkeley, for appel-Court, Appellate Division, First Department. lant. G. W. Files, for respondents. No opin- November 15, 1907.) Action by Dennis E. ion. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and dis- Sheehan against Joseph Martin and another. bursements. Order filed.

No opinion. Motion dismissed, with $10 costs

Order filed. SCHLESINGER v. BUTCHER et al. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department. October 18, 1907.) Action by Leo Schles- SHOEMAKER, Respondent, v. SECURITY inger, as receiver, against Edward Butcher, im- MUT. LIFE INS. CO., Appellant. (Supreme pleaded. No opinion. Motion granted, with Court, Appellate Division, Third Department $10 costs. Order filed.

November 13, 1907.) Action by Henry Shoe

maker against the Security Mutual Life Insur SCHRADER. Respondent, V. ELIAS et al., ance Company. Appellants. (Supreme Court, Appellate Divi- PER CURIAM. Order affirmed, with $10 sion, Fourth Department. October 16, 1907.) costs and disbursements. Action by John Schrader, an infant, etc., against SMITH, P. J., dissents. Gabriel Elias and another. No opinion. Judgment and order affirmed, with costs.

In re SILKMAN et al. (Supreme Court, Ap

pellate Division, Second Department. October SCHULTZ, Respondent, v. YVELIN, Appel- 11, 1907.) In the matter

of the accounting of lant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Sec Theodore H. Silkman, James G. Shaw, and J.

« PreviousContinue »