Contract reciting that "we, the undersigned
officers" of a certain corporation, agree, etc., and
signed by such officers. Held a corporate, and
not an individual, contract obligation.-Groves
v. Acker (Sup.) 406.

Members and stockholders.

Refusal to allow stockholder to inspect books
is not justified by the fact that he proposes to
have assistance of his attorney.-People v. Nas-
sau Ferry Co. (Sup.) 244.

Director of corporation who is the husband
of a stockholder is not, by reason of that fact,
interested in an action which he procures to be
brought against the corporation for his wife's
benefit, so as to entitle a stockholder to set
aside the judgment.-In re Gardner (Sup.) 326.
Stockholder cannot apply to set aside judg-
ment against corporation suffered for purpose of
preferring creditors.-In re Gardner (Sup.) 326.
Stockholder is liable for corporate debts con-
tracted during default in filing annual report,
though report was filed before debt became due.
-Providence Steam & Gas Pipe Co. v. Connell
(Sup.) 482.

In action to charge stockholder with corporate
debts, complaint must allege that stock was not
issued in payment of property.-Herbert v. Dur-
yea (Sup.) 1031.

Foreign corporations.

Foreign corporations may sue on contract
made in the state where it procures certificate
of authority to do business before bringing suit,
but after making contract.-Neuchatel Asphalte
Co. v. City of New York (Com. Pl.) 64.

Statute requiring foreign corporation to obtain
certificate authority before it can sue applies
only to actions on a contract.-Joseph Schlitz
Brewing Co. v. Ester (Sup.) 143.

contracts previously made.-Providence Steam &
Gas Pipe Co. v. Connell (Sup.) 482.

In action against foreign corporation, facts re-
quired by Code Civ. Proc. § 1780, must affir a-
tively appear.-Ladenburg v. Commercial Bank
(Sup.) 821.

When courts of New York will not take juris
diction of action between foreign corporations on
contract made and to be performed in foreign
state.-Delaware, L. & W. R. Co. v. New York,
S. & W. R. Co. (Sup.) 1081.

Whether cause of action arose within the
state, so as to give court jurisdiction over foreign
corporation, must be determined by pleadings
alone.-Delaware, L. & W. R. Co. v. New York,
S. & W. R. Co. (Sup.) 1081.

COSTS.

In condemnation proceedings, see "Eminent
Domain."
Liability of executor, see "Executors and Ad-
ministrators."

Payment as condition of amendment, see
"Pleading."

Right to costs.

Indemnitors substituted as defendants in place
of sheriff are not entitled to separate bills of
costs.-Isaacs v. Cohen (Sup.) 188.
Who liable.

A person beneficially interested in an action
who defends in the name of another is not liable
for costs.-Peetsch v. Quinn (Com. Pl.) 87; In
re Curran, Id.

Security for costs.

A domestic corporation suing in the city court
of New York cannot be required to give security
for costs.-Edward Thompson Co. v. Lobenthal
(City Ct. N. Y.) 417.

Receiver who prosecutes action brought by
corporation before his appointment will not be
required to give security for costs on the ground
that the corporation was insolvent, where the
receiver was not proceeding in bad faith.-Hale
v. Mason (Sup.) 789.

vent corporation to give security for costs will
When application to compel receiver of insol-
be denied on ground of laches.-Hale v. Mason
(Sup.) 789.

Taxation.

Action for rent is not converted into equitable
action in which costs are in the discretion of the
court merely by making motion for interpleader
New York (Com. Pl.) 41.
which is not granted. Schildwachter v. City of

On appeal to county court no costs are taxable
except such as are specified in Code Civ. Proc. §
3073.-Shaver v. Eldred (Sup.) 158.

Stenographers' fees are not taxable as a dis-

Foreign corporation doing business in Newbursement.-Shaver v. Eldred (Sup.) 158.
York before enactment of Laws 1892, c. 687, re-
quiring a certificate of authority, is thereby au-
thorized to continue without such certificate until
the end of the year, and afterwards to sue on

Costs, after notice of trial, and before trial, are
not taxable, where a new trial has been granted
by order.-Kummer v. Christopher & Tenth St.
R. Co. (Com. Pl.) 581.

Expense of copy of stenographer's minutes of
former trial, procured for use on subsequent trial,
is taxable as a reasonable disbursement.-Kum-

mer v. Christopher & Tenth St. R. Co. (Com.
Pl.) 581.

funds of estate.-In re Leonhard's Estate (Sup.)
303; In re Brenneman, Id.

Code Civ. Proc. § 1780, providing that action
against foreign corporation can be maintained
only in certain cases, is not restrictive of juris-
diction of supreme court.-Ladenburg v. Com-

Defendants who have separate interests and
appear by different attorneys are entitled to sep-mercial Bank (Sup.) 821.
arate bills of costs where demurrer to entire
com.plaint is sustained.-Olifers v. Belmont (Com.
Pl.) 623.

Extra allowance may be granted in equitable
action to guardian ad litem irrespective of stat-
utory provisions. Roberts v. New York El. R.
Co. (Super. N. Y.) 685.

Surrogate cannot tax sum paid to expert wit-
ness by executor in proceeding to probate will.-
In re Bender's Will (Sup.) 907.

Finding by surrogate that compensation of ex-
nert witness in proceeding to probate will is tax-
able as costs according to the course and practice
of the court is not conclusive on supreme court.-
In re Bender's Will (Sup.) 907.

Compensation of expert witness in proceeding
to probate will cannot be taxed as one of the rea-
sonable and necessary expenses which the execu-
tor may incur.-In re Bender's Will (Sup.) 907.
Value of the privilege sought to be enjoined
held to be amount in controversy, for purpose of
computing extra allowance.-Empire City Sub-
way Co. v. Broadway & S. A. R. Co. (Sup.)

1055.

Objections to jurisdiction must be raised by
demurrer or answer.-Delaware, L. & W. R
Co. v. New York, S. & W. R. Co. (Sup.) 1081.

COVENANTS.

Restraining breach, see "Injunction."

Complaint in action on covenant of warranty
for peaceful possession, held not to state a cause
of action.-Kidder v. Bork (Super. Buff.) 663.

Covenant not to use land except for private
dwelling house held not violated by maintaining
dressmaking establishment in dwelling house
erected thereon.-Clark v. Jammes (Sup.) 1020.

CRIMINAL LAW.

See, also, "Forgery"; "Larceny."
Exhibiting false books to public examiner, see
"Corporations."

Failure to support wife, see "Husband and

Wife."

When certificate of conviction in court of spe-
cial sessions sufficiently describes the offense.-
People v. Webster (Sup.) 337.

Conviction will be reversed where circumstan-
ces do not exclude every hypothesis except de-
fendant's guilt.-People v. Maxwell (Sup.) 794.

DAMAGES.

For death by wrongful act, see "Conflict of
Laws."

For failure to pay customer's check, see "Banks
and Banking.'

In condemnation proceedings, see "Eminent
Domain."

Measure of in action against carrier of goods,
see "Carriers."

An award of nominal damages for a substan-
tial injury is erroneous.-Smith v. Ingersoll-Ser-
geant Rock Drill Co. (Com. Pl.) 70.

Verdict for $3.600 for personal injuries held
not excessive.-Paetzig v. Brooklyn City R. Co.
(City Ct. Brook.) 854.

Measure of damages for cutting shade trees is
the difference between value of land before tree
Howell
cut and afterwards.-Edsall v.

was

(Sup.) 892.

Measure of damages for breach of agreement
by defendant to pay plaintiff's indebtedness to
third person is amount of such indebtedness.-
Wright v. Chapin (Sup.) 1068.

Death by Wrongful Act.
Damages, see "Conflict of Laws."

Code Civ. Proc. § 872, subd. 5, does not forbid
taking deposition of infirm party to action. -

Claims against estates of, see "Executors and Jarvis v. Brennan (Sup.) 723.
Administrators."

to real estate must require release of premises | the fund in his hands.-Bamberger v. Fillebrown
injured and of liens thereon.-Kissam v. Brook- (Com. Pl.) 614.
lyn El. R. Co. (Sup.) 740.

Evidence held not sufficient to show that con-
struction of defendant's elevated railroad in-
jured plaintiff's abutting property. - Beck v.
Brooklyn El. R. Co. (Sup.) 764.

When renewal of a lease will not be rescinded
at the instance of the lessee, on the ground
that she was induced by the representations of
the lessor to waive her rights.-Terry v. Moore
(Com. Pl.) 846; Syms v. Same, Id.

Refusal to find that benefited portion of prem-
ises alleged to have been injured by the con-
struction of elevated railroad in street on which-Finlay v. Leary (Sup.) 872.
it abuts exceeded injuries to other portions held

Equity has jurisdiction to set aside uncon-
scionable agreement between attorney and client.

-

erroneous. Market V. Manhattan Ry. Co.
(Sup.) 842.

When deed of land, part of which had been
condemned for public use, does not pass award
for portion taken.-Simms v. City of Brooklyn
(Sun.) 859.

Rental value of the premises alleged to have
been injured by construction of elevated railroad
in front thereof is total sum for which they may

be rented without deducting for vacancies.-
Brooklyn El. R. Co. v. Lewis (Sup.) 881.

Petition in condemnation proceedings may be
amended.-City of Syracuse v. Stacey (Sup.) 929.
Petition in proceeding to condemn water rights
held not to sufficiently describe the property
sought to be condemned.-City of Syracuse v.
Stacey (Sup.) 929.

Rule that contract will not be rescinded un-

less complaining party returns what she received
under it applied.-Spannochia v. Loew (Sup.)
1050.

ment.-Smith v. Fisher (Sup.) 1059.
When court of equity may give money judg-

Stronger degree of proof will be required to re-
scind executed contract than executory contract.
Parfitt v. Kings County Gas & Illuminating
Co. (Sup.) 1111.

ESTOPPEL.

at 10 per cent. money placed in his hands by
Statement by defendant that he had invested
plaintiff, estops him to deny the investment,
and claim credit for excess paid over legal
interest.-Davis v. Myers (Sup.) 352.

Eviction.

The condemnation law (Code Civ. Proc. c. 23)
applies to proceedings by the city of Syracuse to
condemn water rights in the Skaneateles Lake
for the purpose of obtaining water as provided See "Landlord and Tenant."
by Laws 1889, c. 291, as amended by Laws 1890,
c. 314.-City of Syracuse v. Stacey (Sup.) 929.

Syracuse water board is not authorized to con-
demn right to law water pipe from the Skane-
ateles Lake other than 30-inch pipe mentioned in
Laws 1890, c. 314.-City of Syracuse v. Bene-
dict (Sup.) 944.

Separate bills of costs will not be allowed
against defendants who answer jointly in pro-
ceeding to condemn land owned by them as part-
ners.-City of Syracuse v. Benedict (Sup.) 944.
Averments in petition, when denied by answer,
must be proven by petitioner.-City of Syracuse
v. Benedict (Sup.) 944.

When benefits cannot be offset against dam-
ages in proceeding to condemn easements in
street by elevated railroad.-Brooklyn El. R. Co.
v. Flynn (Sup.) 974.

When lessee of premises injured by construc-
tion of elevated railroad has a cause of action
against the company.-Crimmins v. Metropolitan
El. Ry. Co. (Sup.) 984.

EQUITY.

Action for accounting, see "Accounting."
Conversion of realty into personalty, see "Con-
version."

EVIDENCE.

See, also, "Deposition"; "Discovery"; "Wit-

ness.

Weight and sufficiency on appeal, see "Appeal."
Judicial notice.

sometimes buy land intending to resell before
Court will take judicial notice that persons
completing their contract.-Anderson v. Blood
(Sup.) 233.

Declarations and admissions.

Declarations of notary are not admissible to
impeach a certificate made by him.-Kranich-
felt v. Slattery (Com. Pl.) 27.

Acts and declarations inter alios are not ad-
missible to affect parties to an action.-Henry v.
Agostini (Com. Pl.) 37.

Answer in action for injury to goods held not
an admission of charges in complaint.-Tucker v.
Pennsylvania R. Co. (Com. Pl.) 93.

When the declarations of agent are admis
sible against principal.—Dakin v. Walton (Sup.)
203.

Declarations of occupants of portions of a
tract of land as to the boundaries thereof are
evidence only of the extent of their possession.

Defense of adequate remedy at law must be -Skinner v. Odenbach (Sup.) 282.
pleaded.-Gage v. Lippman (Com. Pl.) 59.

Equity has jurisdiction in an action by receiv-
er in supplementary proceedings to determine pri-
orities, where conflicting claims are made against

A party may take advantage of admissions in
his adversary's pleading, so far as they are in his
favor, and disprove the residue.-Cromwell v.
Hughes (Super. N. Y.) 643.