See "Building and Loan Associations"; "Corpo- See "Writs."
See "Horse and Street Railroads."
See "Highways"; "Municipal Corporations."
Right to vote, see "Elections and Voters."
Agreement to work on, see "Contracts."
Supplementary Proceedings.
See "Bail"; "Execution."
Liability for costs of, see "Costs."
On forfeited recognizance, see "Appeal."
See "Principal and Surety."
When order subrogating junior mortgagee to As ground for new trial, see "New Trial."
lien of the first party does not prejudice judg-
ment creditor whose judgment was prior to the
second mortgage.-De Forest v. Peck (Sup.) 413.
Transferee of draft secured by a bill of lading Of lease, see "Landlord and Tenant."
is entitled to subrogation to rights of original
holder.-First Nat. Bank v. New York Cent. &
H. R. R. Co. (Sup.) 604.
Of attorney, see "Attorney and Client."
On indemnitors, see "Eminent Domain."
Summary Proceedings.
See "Landlord and Tenant."
SURVEYS AND SURVEYORS.
Testimony by surveyor that the measures
conformed to the United States standard is not
a compliance with the statute prohibiting sur-
veyors from testifying as to surveys, unless
they state that their measures conformed to the
state standards.
Buff.) 924.
- Palmer v. Robinson (Super.
A check is a sufficient legal tender if not ob-
Suspension of Power of Aliena-jected to.-Wright v. John A. Robinson & Co.
(Sup.) 463.
See "Landlord and Tenant"; "Wills."
On transfers of property, see "Descent and Dis-
tribution."
Petition for certiorari to review assessment
for inequality, held not sufficient.-People v.
Board of Assessors of City of Brooklyn (Sup.)
344.
Tax deed is not void because, at time of de-
livery, land was in possession of third person.-
Fortmann v. Wheeler (Sup.) 384.
Assessment of funds held by trustees is not
vitiated by the fact that it describes them as
executors and trustees.-People v. Barker (Sup.)
Commissioners may correct inaccuracies in
assessment roll as to names of person and words
descriptive of their representative capacities.-
People v. Barker (Sup.) 485.
Tender by check is kept good by paying
money into court without producing check.-
Wright v. John A. Robinson & Co. (Sup.) 463.
Testamentary Capacity.
See "Libel and Slander"; "Negligence"; "Trover
and Conversion."
Liability of city, see "Municipal Corporations."
Town has no authority to employ agent to dis-
charge duties imposed on town officers.-People
v. Board of Town Auditors of Town of Smith-
ville (Sup.) 668.
Entry of assessment against trustees in the Right of person to use his name in business
-name of one of them is a sufficient compliance does not authorize him to give his name to a
with section 818 of the consolidation act, requir- corporation for the purpose of engaging in busi-
ing assessments to be entered in alphabetical ness conducted by others under the same name.
order of names of persons subject to taxation.--De Long v. De Long Hook & Eye Co. (Sup.)
People v. Barker (Sup.) 485.
Transactions with Decedents.
See "Witness."
See, also, "Appeal": "Evidence"; "Judgment";
"Pleading"; "Practice in Civil Cases"; "Ref-
erence"; "Witness."
Verdict which is not secundum allegata et
probata cannot stand.--Metz v. Campbell Print-
ing-Press & Manuf'g Co. (Com. Pl.) 155.
Objection to question will not be considered
where it was not made until answer was giv-
en.-Perkins v. Brainard Quarry Co. (Com. Pl.)
230.
Reopening case on rebuttal is discretionary.—
Fox v. Matthiessen (Sup.) 356.
Defendant is entitled to open and close, where
answer contains no denial, but sets up counter-
claim.-Harley v. Fitzgerald (Sup.) 414.
Right to open and close is substantial, and
failure to grant it in a proper case is fatal error.
Harley v. Fitzgerald (Sup.) 414.
It is in the discretion of the court to open the
case, and supply defects in evidence.-Woolsey
v. Trustees of Village of Ellenville (Sup.) 543.
Request by both parties for direction of ver-
dict authorizes court to find on the questions of
fact.-Fogarty v. Hook (Sup.) 555.
Finding that plaintiff has failed to establish
case by clear preponderance of evidence is not a
finding of fact.-Franck v. Franck (Super. N. See "Wills."
Y.) 774.
General objection is not sufficient to present
question as to admissibility of evidence under Creation of highway by, see "Highways."
Code Civ. Proc. § 829, relating to transactions
with decedent.-Cross v. Smith (Sup.) 671.
Affidavit by obligor that no defense whatever
existed to bond estops him to set up usury there-
Where both parties claim title from the same
in as against subsequent purchaser for value
person, it is error to exclude testimony of such without notice of the usury.-Stoll v. Reel (City
person offered by one of the parties as to trans-Ct. Brook.) 737.
fer of title. - Kilpatrick v. Ludwig Carved-
Moulding Co. (City Ct. N. Y.) 922.
Recovery, based on value of goods at time of See "Constitutional Law"; "Health."
trial, cannot be sustained where value was not
shown to be fluctuating, and no malice was
shown.-Sonenberg v. Levy (Com. Pl.) 1130.
Agreement to pay trustee commissions, see "Con-
tracts."
Evidence held sufficient to identify, in the
hands of assignee for the benefit of creditors,
property alleged to have been held in trust by
assignor.-Andrews v. Welling (Sup.) 4.
VENDOR AND PURCHASER.
See, also, "Fraudulent Conveyances"; "Judicial
Sales"; "Sale"; "Specific Performance."
Assignment of contract, see "Assignment."
Option to purchase, see "Contracts."
What constitutes exercise of option to the
purchaser.-Smith v. Fisher (Sup.) 216.
Agreement in reference to land, held not to
impair marketable character of owner's title.-
Simon v. Vanderveer (Sup.) 394.
not justify purchaser in refusing to take title.-
Existence of running stream on land sold does
Archer v. Archer (Sup.) 410.
Receiver of insolvent will not be compelled to
pay claim for money of petitioner alleged to
have been used by insolvent in purchasing goods,
unless amount in receiver's hands of goods so
Covenant in deed that grantee assumes mort-
purchased be shown.-Liebmann v. Liebmanngage given by grantor on other premises creates
Bros. Co. (Sup.) 406; In re Lazerus, Id.
a lien on the premises conveyed for amount of
(Sup.) 657.
mortgage.-Binghamton Sav. Bank v. White
Where portions of a trust are illegal, but can
be separated from the legal portions without
defeating the purpose of the trust, so much as
is legal will be carried into effect.-Roberts v.
Carey (Sup.) 563.
Deposit of money held not to create trust with-
in rule. A sufficient intention to create a trust
must be shown, and beneficiary must be desig-
nated.-Wilcox v. Gilchrist (Sup.) 608.
Statute against secret trusts does not apply
where trust is for the benefit of a person other
than he who pays the purchase money.-McCa- Of pleadings, see "Pleading."
hill v. McCahill (Sup.) 836.
When title of grantee of trustee who purchas-
ed trust property at mortgage foreclosure sale
will not be disturbed.-Kahn v. Chapin (Sup.) See "Office and Officer."
Court cannot appoint trustee in place of de-
ceased surviving trustee.-Wildey v. Robinson See "Municipal Corporations.”
(Sup.) 1018.
When trustee, who is also executor, is entitled
to commissions in both capacities.
Robinson (Sup.) 1018.
See "Elections and Voters."
Filing nunc pro tunc, see "Replevin."
See "Master and Servant.”
e, also, "Executors and Administrators."
iability of lessee, see "Landlord and Tenant."
Action for waste will not lie against lessee
r waste committed by assignee of lease.-Don-
d v. Elliott (Cir. Ct.) 821.
WATERS AND WATER
COURSES.
Municipal corporation is not liable for damages
used by discharge of surface water, resulting
lely from grading and paving of streets.-An-
or Brewing Co. v. Village of Dobbs Ferry
up.) 371.
One who pollutes stream flowing into another's
sh pond is liable for injury to fish.-Smith v.
ranford (Sup.) 375.
e, also, "Executors and Administrators";
"Trusts."
Mutual wills are revocable in New York un-
38 executed pursuant to contract.-Edson v.
rsons (Sup.) 1036.
When rule that beneficiary under will entitled
proceeds of land may take the land itself,
es not apply. - Foote v. Bruggerhoff (Sup.)
Any person interested may examine witnesses
application for probate of will.-In re Rie-
's Estate (Surr.) 168; In re Bratt, Id.
aud and undue influence.
Will held to have been procured by undue in-
ence of testator's wife.-In re Nolte's Will
urr.) 226.
Legacy to attorney does not show undue in-
ence. In re Suydam's Will (Sup.) 449.
Evidence held to show undue influence.-In re
ratt's Will (Surr.) 1092.
It will be presumed that testator knew the
tents of the will, where there is nothing to
ow want of good faith.-In re Seagrist's Will
irr.) 1095.
Evidence held sufficient to show testamentary
acity, when will was executed a few hours
ore death. In re Seagrist's Will (Surr.) 1095.
lidity and requisites.
Condition imposed on lega tee that he should
ry testatrix in a certain cemetery is valid.-In
Riegle's Estate (Surr.) 168; In re Bratt, Id.
Limitation over for devise of absolute estate
oid for repugnancy.—Banzer v. Banzer (Com.
) 266.
Alleged olographic will held spurious. In re
Gaines' Will (Sup.) 398; In re Perkins, Id.
Ill feeling and prejudice, though unjustifiable,
do not vitiate will.-In re Suydam's Will,
(Sup.) 449.
Signatures of attesting witnesses held not at
end of will.-In re Blair's Will (Sup.) 845.
Construction.
Provision chat expenses of educating infant
legatee be charged against his share of the es-
tate on final settlement held to include cost of
clothing, services of physician, etc., while at col-
lege. In re Atwood's Estate (Surr.) 115.
Language intended to create power of sale
will be liberally construed.-Lesser v. Lesser
(Super. N. Y.) 167.
Power of sale contained in will should be lib-
erally construed.-Lesser v. Lesser (Super. N.
Y.) 167.
Devise in fee simple held not cut down by sub-
sequent limitation.-Newcomb v. Lush (Sup.)
526.
Will held to give testator's widow life estate
with power of disposal.-Kendall v. Case (Sup.)
553.
Will leaving "disposal" of property to executor,
to be divided among heirs as he may deem best,
held not to create a trust.-In re Spears (Surr.)
819
![[blocks in formation]](https://books.google.com.bd/books/content?id=mtgKAAAAYAAJ&output=html_text&pg=PA1183&img=1&zoom=3&hl=en&q=%22by+virtue+of+any+law+so+repealed,+but+the+same+may+be+asserted,+enforced,+prosecuted,+or+inflicted+as+fully+and%22&cds=1&sig=ACfU3U2XOzvaDjUhhdncWkkWaeHkuwF89w&edge=0&edge=stretch&ci=434,782,500,397)
made contract sued on is no reason for discred-
Fact that a witness, as agent for plaintiff,
iting him.-Johnson v. Doll (Com. Pl.) 132.
Evidence relating to a material issue given by
tradicted.-City of New York v. Roller (Com.
a witness on cross-examination may be con-
Pl.) 139.
Question on cross-examination held proper, as
tending to show interest of witness in result of
action.-Goodman v. Myers (Com. Pl.) 239.
'When party to action cannot testify as to
transactions with decedent.-Sheldon v. Sheldon
(Sup.) 419.
Inconsistent statements made by a witness
out of court are admissible to affect his credi-
bility.-People v. Brockett (Sup.) 511.
Conversation with decedent held not within
the inhibition of Code Civ. Proc. § 829.-Bump
v. Pratt (Sup.) 538.
Witness who has testified as to occupation at
time of occurrences narrated by her may be
cross-examined as to her present whereabouts
and occupation, though it tends to an exposure
of her past life.-People v. Martin (Sup.) 933.
Witness cannot be corroborated by entries in
his own books.-People v. Martin (Šup.) 943.
Managing agent of foreign corporation on
whom summons may be served need not be
managing agent in the state. - Coler v. Pitts-
burgh Bridge Co. (Sup.) 439.
Summons in district court of New York City
must give defendant's name, unless plaintiff does
not know his real name.-Fischer v. Hethering-
ton (Super. N. Y.) 795.
Who is "managing agent" on whom summons
against foreign corporation may be served.-
Palmer v. Chicago Evening Post Co. (Sup.) 992.
WEST PUBLISHING CO., PRINTERS ANd stereotYPERS, ST. PAUL, MINN.
|