Page images
PDF
EPUB
[ocr errors][ocr errors]

STEINHARDT et al. v. BINGHAM et al. | by Mary E. Stresi against John Breidmyer. E. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First De- W. S. Johnston, for appellant. J. Murphy, for partment. February 20, 1903.) Action by respondent. No opinion. Order affirmed, with Emanuel Steinhardt and another against David $10 costs and disbursements. Bingham and another. Plaintiffs move for new trial on exceptions ordered to be heard in the first instance at the Appellate Division. New trial. A Blumenstiel, for plaintiffs. Jacob F. Miller, for defendants.

MCLAUGHLIN, J. For the reasons stated in the opinion of Mr. Justice Hatch on the previous appeal in this case (Steinhardt v. Bingham, 53 App. Div. 286, 65 N. Y. Supp. 838), the exceptions should be sustained, and a new trial ordered, with costs to the plaintiffs to abide the

[blocks in formation]

STIASNY v. METROPOLITAN ST. R. CO. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department. January 16, 1903.) Action by Caroline Stiasny against the Metropolitan Street Railroad Company. No opinion. Motion denied, with $10 costs.

STOUTENBURGH, Respondent, v. BUSH CO., Limited, Appellant (two cases). (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department. February 11, 1903.) Action by Arthur T. Stoutenburgh, as temporary receiver, etc., against Bush Company, Limited. (Actions Nos. 1 and 2). PER CURIAM. This is a renewal of an application for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals. The original application was opposed and denied. No papers are presented to us upon this application, except the notice of motion and the admission of service by the attorney for the respondent. These papers are manifestly insufficient, and the motion is denied, with $10 costs.

STREETS v. GRAND TRUNK RY. CO. of CANADA et al. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department. January 30, 1903.) Action by Jesse Streets against the Grand Trunk Railway Company of Canada and the New York Central & Hudson River Railroad Company. No opinion. Motion for reargument denied, with $10 costs and disbursements. Motion for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals denied. See 78 N. Y. Supp. 729.

STRESI, Respondent, v. BREIDMYER, Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellant Division, First Department. February 6, 1903.) Action

STRONG, Appellant, v. INTERNATIONAL RY. CO., Respondent. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department. January 20, 1903.) Action by Bushnell Strong against the International Railway Company. No opinion. Judgment and order affirmed, with costs.

STROWGER et al., Plaintiffs, v. AMERICAN BONDING & TRUST CO. of BALTIMORE CITY, Defendants. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department. January 6, 1903.) Action by Walter S. Strowger and another against the American Bonding & Trust Company of Baltimore City, impleaded, etc. No opinion. Defendants' exceptions overruled, motion for new trial denied, and judgment ordered for the plaintiffs on the verdict, with costs.

SUGDEN, Appellant, V. PARTRIDGE, Com'r, Respondent. (Supreme Court, Appellate Divsion, First Department. January 16, 1963.) In the matter of Edward D. Sugden against John N. Partridge, commissioner. W. C. De Witt, for appellant. T. Connoly, for respondent. No opinion. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements, on the opinion in Lahey v. Partridge (decided Jan. 9, 1903) 79 N. Y. Supp. 724.

SUTHERLAND v. MEAD et al.

(Supreme

Court, Appellate Division, First Department. February 13, 1903.) Action by George R. Sutherland against Charles H. Mead and Thomas Taft, impleaded. From an order denying a motion to open a default, defendants Mead and Taft appeal. Affirmed. A. H. F. Seeger, for appellants. Edward Hassett, for respondent.

HATCH, J. This case is disposed of by the opinion in Sutherland v. Mead et al. (handed down herewith) 80 N. Y. Supp. 504. The order should be affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. All concur.

SVENSON, Appellant, v. SVENSON, Respondent. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department. January 23, 1903.) Action by Marguerite Svenson against Oscar H. Svenson. No opinion. Motion denied.

==

In re TALBOT. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department. January 27, 1903.) In the matter of the proceedings for the disbarment of Frank W. Talbot, as attorney and counselor at law. No opinion. Order to show cause returnable March 10, 1903, entered.

TALLON, Respondent, v. MORGAN et al., Appellants. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department. January 16, 1903.) Action by Katherine Tallon against Joseph F. Morgan and Robert W. Oliver. No opinion. Judgment and order of the County Court of Queens county affirmed, with costs.

TANENBAUM, Appellant, v. WHIFFEN, Respondent. (Supreme Court, Appellate Di

and 114 New York State Reporter

vision, First Department. February 6, 1903.) Action by Moses Tanenbaum against Thomas B. Whiffen. L. N. Levi, for appellant. O. C. Sommerich, for respondent. No opinion. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements.

TEACHOUT et al., Appellants, v. TRUAX, Respondent. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department. January 6, 1903.) Action by Phebe R. Teachout and another against Murty Truax. No opinion. Interlocutory judgment affirmed, with costs to the respondent, with leave to the plaintiffs to serve an amended complaint upon payment of the costs of the demurrer and of this appeal.

TEW v. WOLFSOHN. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department. January 23, 1903.) Action by H. Whitney Tew against Henry Wolfsohn, impleaded. No opinion. Motion granted.

TIRRILL, Respondent, v. SNIFFEN et al., Defendants (LIVINGSTON, Appellant). (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department. January 16, 1903.) Action by Oakes Tirrill against Edward D. Sniffen and others; James Duane Livingston, appellant. No opinion. Appeal dismissed, with $10 costs and disburse

ments.

TIRRILL, Respondent, v. SNIFFEN et al. (NORTH AMERICAN TRUST CO., Appellant). (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department. January 9, 1903.) Action by Oakes Tirrill against Edward D. Sniffen, the North American Trust Company, appellant, and the Washington Life Insurance Company, defendant. No opinion. Order reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements, and order for examination vacated on the ground that no sufficient reason appears for examining the officers of the defendant before the trial rather than at the

trial itself. See Hay v. Zeiger, 50 App. Div. 462, 64 N. Y. Supp. 202.

In re TOWNSEND AVE. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department. January 9, 1963.) In the matter of Townsend avenue. No opinion. Motion denied.

TREADWELL et al., Respondents, v. J. A. MEAD MFG. CO., Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department. December 19, 1902.) Action by M. H. Treadwell & Co. against the J. A. Mead Manufacturing Company. R. B. Knowles, for appellant. J. J. Adams, for respondents. No opinion. Motion denied, without costs.

UPTON et al., Plaintiffs, v. SCOTTISH UNION & NATIONAL INS. CO., Defendant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department. November 18, 1902.) Action by Eli M. Upton and another against the Scottish Union & National Insurance Company. No opinion. Defendant's exceptions overruled, motion for new trial denied, with costs, and judgment ordered for the plaintiffs upon the verdict, with costs.

[blocks in formation]

ING, Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate DiWEDDIGAN et al., Respondents, v. WHIT vision, Fourth Department. January 13, 1903.) Action by Frank A. Weddigan and others against William F. Whiting. No opinion. Judgment affirmed, with costs.

ADAMS, P. J., not voting.

Division, Second Department. January 9, 1903) In re WEEKS. (Supreme Court, Appellate In the matter of the application of C. Louis Weeks for admission to the bar. No opinion. Application granted.

et. al., Respondents. (Supreme Court, Appellate WENK, Appellant, v. CITY OF NEW YORK Division, Second Department. January 9, 1993.) Action by Theodore Wenk against the city of New York and others. No opinion. Motion granted, and reargument of demurrers to the answer set down for January 23, 1903.

WERNER, Respondent, v. HEARST, Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Seeond Department. January 9, 1903.) Action by Melle S. T. Werner against William R. Hearst. No opinion. Leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals granted.

WERNER, Respondent, v. HEARST, Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department. January 23, 1903.) Action by Melle S. T. Werner against William R. Hearst. No opinion. Order settled by certifying that a question of law is involved which ought to be reviewed by the Court of Appeals, under subdivision 2 of section 191 of the Code of Civil Procedure, without specifying any particular question. See Commercial Bank v. Sherwood, 162 N. Y. 310, 56 N. E. 834.

[blocks in formation]

WILSON v. WILSON et al. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department. January 20, 1903.) Action by Edward C. Wilson, an infant, by Eliza J. Sponenberg, his guardian ad litem, against Winfield Wilson and others. No opinion. Motion granted.

Appellate Division, Third Department. January In re WILSON'S ESTATE. (Supreme Court, 23, 1903.) In the matter of the estate of Mary Sutherland Wilson, deceased. No opinion. Motion granted.

WISE et al., Respondents, v. NEW YORK ELEVATED R. Court, Appellate Division, First Department. CO.. Appellant. (Supreme February 6, 1903.) Action by Adelia Wise and another against the New York Elevated Railroad Company. F. Allis, for appellant. A. B. Smith, for respondents. No opinion. Judgment affirmed, with costs.

ZELTNER v. HENRY ZELTNER BREWING CO. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department. February 11, 1903.) Action by William H. Zeltner individually and as executor, etc., against the Henry Zeltner Brewing Company. No opinion. Application for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals granted, and questions certified as formulated in the brief for the Yorkville Bank.

ZIMMERMAN v. MEYROWITZ. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department. February 6, 1903.) Action by Charles L. Zimmerman against Emil B. Meyrowitz. No opinion. Motion denied, with $10 costs.

PUTNAM et al., Appellants, v. PUTNAM et al., Respondents. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department. December 9, 1902.) Action by John Lewis Putnam and others against John R. Putnam and others. No opinion. Motion denied. See 78 N. Y. Supp. 987.

END OF CASES IN VOL. 80.

[blocks in formation]

An assignee cannot be substituted as plaintiff. § 1. Proceedings and relief.
in an action commenced by his assignor under Employé of law firm, suing for an accounting,
Code Civ. Proc. § 756, without notice to him.-held to have an adequate remedy at law, en-
Betts v. De Selding (Sup.) 799.
titling case to be put on jury calendar.-Lee v.
Washburn (Sup.) 1040.

§ 2. Death of party and revival of ac-
tion.

Under Code Civ. Proc. §§ 756, 757, an action
held properly continued in the name of plaintiff's
administrator.-Betts v. De Selding (Sup.) 799.

ABUTTING OWNERS.

Assessments for expenses of public improve-
ments, see "Municipal Corporations," $ 5.
Compensation for taking of or injury to lands
or easements for public use, see "Eminent
Domain," §§ 1, 3.

ACCEPTANCE.

Of goods sold within statute of frauds, see
"Frauds, Statute of," § 1.

Of performance of contract, see "Contracts,"
§ 4.
Of surrender of lease, see "Landlord and Ten-
ant," § 2.

ACCOMPLICES.

Testimony, see "Criminal Law," § 3.

ACCORD AND SATISFACTION.
See "Compositions with Creditors"; "Compro-
mise and Settlement"; "Novation"; "Pay-
ment"; "Release.'

Payment of $50 cash and giving judgment
debtor's note for $50 held not to support agree-
80 N.Y.S.-73

[blocks in formation]

(1153)

[ocr errors]
« PreviousContinue »