and 146 New York State Reporter BARNET TEXTILE CO. v. GREILICH. BITTMAN, Respondent, v. DUCKWORTH (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third De- Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Divi partment. October 2, 1908.) Action by the Bar- sion, Second Department. October 9. 1 net Textile Company against William Greilich. Action by Fred Bittman against Walter & No opinion. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and Duckworth. No opinion. Motion denied. disbursements. BASTABLE, Respondent, v. CARROLL, Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department. October 16, 1908.) Action by Lawrence Bastable against William J. Car roll. W. Armstrong, for appellant. R. W. Crawford, for respondent. No opinion. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. Order filed. See, also, 116 App. Div. 205, 101 N. Y. Supp. 637. BATES, Respondent, v. DELAWARE, L. & W. R. CO., Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department. September 17, 1908.) Action by Frederick E. Bates against the Delaware, Lackawanna & Western Railroad Company. No opinion. Judgment and order unanimously affirmed, with costs. BAYNE, Respondent, v. BRADWELL et al., Appellants. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department. October 16, 1908.) Action by Rachel Bayne against Herbert A. Bradwell, and others. No opinion. Judgment of the Municipal Court reversed, and new trial ordered, costs to abide the event, upon the ground that the verdict is against the weight of the evidence. In re BELMONT ST. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department. November 6, 1908.) In the matter of Belmont street. No opinion. Appeal dismissed, with $10 costs and disbursements. Settle orders on notice. See, also, 112 N. Y. Supp. 858. BENNETT, Appellant, v. TUCKER ELECTRICAL CONST. CO., Respondent. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department. October 9, 1908.) Action by Edward J. Bennett against the Tucker Electrical Construction Company. No opinion. Judgment unanimously affirmed, with costs. BERENBERG et al., Appellants, v. BIEBER, Respondent. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division. Second Department. October 16, 1908.) In re BOARD OF RAPID TRANSIT E COM'RS. (Supreme Court, Appellate D sion, First Department. May, 1908) In the matter of the Board of Rapid Transit F In the matter of Th road Commissioners. In the matter of Fourte avenue route. Street route. In the matter of White Pla Railroad route. In the matter of Jerone are nue subway. In the matter of Girard avene In the matter of Thirty-Fourth street 20 In the matter of Seventh and Eighth av route. In the matter of Lexington avec route. No opinions. See memorandum. BONHOFF, Appellant, v. FISCHER R spondent, et al. (Supreme Court, Appelat Division, Second Department. October 1 Action by August Bonhoff against Herry Fischer, impleaded with William Kere No opinion. Motion denied. BONIFACE, Respondent, v. MCAVOY, A pellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Divis Second Department. October 22, 19083) tion by Minnie E. Boniface against John McAvoy, executor, etc. No opinion. O1 affirmed, on argument, with $10 costs and bursements. BORCHER T, Respondent, v. MANHA TAN TRANSFER CO., Appellant. (Supre Court, Appellate Division, First Departme October 16, 1908.) Action by Bertha Berc as administratrix, against the Manhattan In sit Company. J. J. Mahoney, for appels Order affirmed, with $10 costs and dista A. V. Rochester, for respondent. No on ments. Order filed. Action by Bernard Berenberg and another BORGES, Respondent, v. FREEDMAN, 4 against Charles Bieber. No opinion. Judg pellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Divis ment of the Municipal Court affirmed, with First Department. November 6, 1908) tion by Henry Borges against Joseph Fre man. M. C. Katz, for appellant. H. S for respondent. costs. BIEBER v. ROSENGARTEN. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department. October 23, 1908.) Action by Aaron Bieber against Philip Rosengarten. No opinion. Motion denied. Order filed. BISTER, Respondent, v. GREENBERG, Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department. October 22, 1908.) Action by John Bister against Abraham Greenberg. No opinion. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, MCLAUGHLIN, J., dissents. costs. Order filed. BOYD V. BOYD. (Supreme Court. A late Division, First Department. October 1908.) Action by Margaret P. Bord ag Alexander Boyd. No opinion. Motion to a default granted, on payment of $10 costs on condition that appellant have appeal re argument at the December term. Settle improper, and that the case should have been submitted to the jury. r on notice. RGHEN, Respondent, v. SAVAGE et al., lants. (Supreme Court, Appellate DiviFourth Department, October 14, 1908.) n by William J. Burghen against LawSavage and others. R CURIAM. Judgment and order reversnd new trial ordered, with costs to appelto abide event, unless the plaintiff, withdays, stipulates to reduce the verdict to um of $4,000 as of the date of the renthereof, in which event the judgment is fed accordingly, and, as so modified, is, her with the order, affirmed, without costs is appeal to either party. RNS, Appellant, v. STAUNTON et al., ondents. (Supreme Court, Appellate DiviFourth Department. October 7, 1908.) n by George G. Burns against William mton and another. R CURIAM. Judgment and order red, and new trial ordered, with costs to apat to abide event. Held, that nonsuit was MCLENNAN, P. J., dissents. In re BURWELL'S ESTATE. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department. October 17, 1908.) In the matter of the estate of Dudley Burwell, deceased. PER CURIAM. All the motions to dismiss the appeals are denied, without costs. Leave is given to all the parties to give such addiditional security as is necessary to perfect their appeals. The matter of the settlement of the case and exceptions must be determined by the lower court. Motions with reference thereto are here improper. Order to be settled before Mr. Justice WILLIAMS on two days' notice. BUTTERICK PUB. CO., Respondent, v. CHABOT, Appellant. (Supreme Court, ApOctober pellate Division, First Department. 16, 1908.) Action by the Butterick Publishing Company against Theodore J. Chabot. S. Bacon, for appellant. J. B. Sheehan, for respondent. PER CURIAM. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. Order filed. INGRAHAM and SCOTT, JJ., dissent. CALVERT v. CALVERT. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department. October 7, 1908.) Action by James A. Calvert against Rebecca M. Calvert. PER CURIAM. Order modified, so as to permit the plaintiff to pay into court the sum of $250 in lieu of bond, as provided in section 3272 of the Code of Civil Procedure, and, as so modified, affirmed, without costs of this appeal to either party. CARLSON, Respondent, v. VON HOVELING AMERICAN COMPOSITION CO., Limited, Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department. October 16, 1908.) Action by Charles Carlson against the Von Hoveling American Composition Company, Limited. No opinion. Judgment and order reversed, and new trial granted, costs to abide the event, on the ground that there is no satisfactory proof of negligence on the part of the defendant. and 146 New York State Reporter CAROLAN, Respondent, v. O'DONNELL et al., Appellants. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department. November 6, 1908.) Action by Patrick Carolan, individually, etc., against Anthony O'Donnell and others. J. W. Osborne, for appellants. M. J. O'Brien, for respondent. PER CURIAM. Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. Order filed. MCLAUGHLIN, and HOUGHTON, JJ., dissent on the ground that the evidence made a mere question of fact for the jury. CARROLL, Respondent, v. NEW YORK, N. H. & H. R. CO., Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department. October 16, 1908.) Action by William J. Carroll against the New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad Company. No opinion. Judgment and order unanimously affirmed, with costs. CASSELL & CO., Limited, Respondent, v. H. H. McCLURE & CO., Appellants. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department. October 16, 1908.) Action by Cassell & Co., Limited, against H. H. McClure & Co. C. A. Brodek, for appellants. E. P. Lyon, for respondent. No opinion. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. Order filed. In re CATHOLIC WOMEN'S LEGION. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department. November 6, 1908.) In the matter of the Catholic Women's Legion. No opinion. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. Order filed. CHAMBERLAIN et al., Appellants, v. SHERMAN et al., Respondents. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department. October 7, 1908.) Action by Dwight P. Chamberlain and others, as executors, etc., against Stephen L. Sherman and others. PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with costs. Held, that although the finding of the trial court that the premises in question comprise a farm, within the meaning of chapter 305, p. 641, of the Laws of 1903, is contrary to and against the weight of evidence, yet the decision of the court was correct in result, and the judgment entered thereon should be affirmed. tion of books and papers, defendant appeal CHILDS, Respondent, v. HOWDEN, A pellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Divis First Department. October 16, 1908) A by Starling W. Childs against Thomas F. H den. A. G. N. Vermilya, for appellant. C. 1 Thorn, for respondent. No opinion. Orler a firmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. der filed. C. H. RUGG CO., Appellant, v. ORMEGE Respondent. (Supreme Court, Appellate sion, Fourth Department. October 14, 2 Action by the C. H. Rugg Company ar William L. Ormrod. PER CURIAM. Judgment of County Co reversed, and judgment of Municipal Ceart a firmed, with costs in this court and the coa below. KRUSE, J., dissents. C. H. RUGG CO., Appellant, v. ORMEO Respondent. (Supreme Court. Appellate sion, Fourth Department. November 11, Action by the C. H. Rugg Company William L. Ormrod. No opinion. Metion leave to appeal to Court of Appeals granted CITY OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. ELM et al., Appellants. (Supreme Court, Apr Division, First Department. October 23, Action by the city of New York agains CHANOWITZ, Appellant, V. UNION L. Rice and another. N. G. Johnson, for SWITCH CO., Respondent. (Supreme Court, pellants. T. Connoly, for respondent. No Appellate Division, First Department. Novem-ion. Judgment (56 Misc. Rep. 300, 107 N ber 6, 1908.) Action by Charles Chanowitz Supp. 641) affirmed, with costs. Order fled against the Union Switch Company. W. S. Burt, for appellant. C. MacVeagh, for respond ent. PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with costs. Order filed. PATTERSON, P. J., dissents. CHARLES v. MANHATTAN TELEGRAPH CO. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department. November 6, 1908.) Appeal from Trial Term, New York County. Action by Adelaide Charles, as administratrix of William F. Coffee, against the Manhattan Telegraph Company. From an order granting an inspec CLARE, Appellant, v. MUTUAL LIFE IN CO. OF NEW YORK, Respondent. (Se Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Depar October 7, 1908.) Action by Thomas E against the Mutual Life Insurance Com New York. No opinion. Judgment a with costs. CLARKE, Appellant, v. MATZKIN & Respondents. (Supreme Court, Appellate D sion, Second Department. October Action by Audley Clarke against Mar Ma and others. No opinion. Judgment of County Court of Kings county reversed, trial ordered, costs to abide the event, upon | First Department. October 16, 1908.) Action authority of Weideman v. Zielinska, 102 by Julia Cole against Claus S. Hinck and othp. Div. 163, 92 N. Y. Supp. 493. ers. J. J. O'Kennedy, for appellant. J. H. Esser, for respondents. No opinion. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. Order filed. LARKE, Appellant, v. NEW YORK CENT. 1. R. R. CO., Respondent. (Supreme Court, bellate Division, Second Department. Octo16, 1908.) Action by William J. Clarke inst the New York Central & Hudson River Iroad Company. No opinion. Motion deI, on the ground that the motion papers are sufficiently specific to show the points on ch the motion is made. See, also, 104 APP. 167, 93 N. Y. Supp. 525. COLEMAN, Plaintiff, v. GOULD, Defendant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department. October 14, 1908.) Action by Hutson B. Coleman, as administrator, Defendant's exceptions overruled, motion for etc., against William S. Gould. No opinion. new trial denied, with costs, and judgment diLARKSON, Respondent, v. SABINE. Ap-rected for the plaintiff upon the verdict, with ant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, rth Department. September 30, 1908.) on by Alonzo R. Clarkson against John B. ine. No opinion. Order affirmed, with $10 s and disbursements. re CLEMENT. (Supreme Court, AppelDivision, First Department. October 30, 3) In the matter of Maynard N. Clement. opinion. Motion granted, with $10 costs. er filed. costs. In re COLLYER. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department. October 16, 1908.) In the matter of the accounting of Charles S. Collyer, as administrator of Elizabeth Collyer, deceased. No opinion. In re motion of Henry M. Collyer, as administrator of William Edwin Collyer, that Fanny Collyer, as executrix of Charles S. Collyer, pay money into court. Motion granted. See, also, 113 App. Div. 468, 99 N. Y. Supp. 213, and 124 App. Div. 16, 108 N. Y. Supp. 600. re CLEMENT, Excise Com'r. (Supreme rt. Appellate Division, Fourth Department. 24, 1908.) In the matter of the petition of COLVIN, Appellant, v. SHAW, Respondent, nard N. Clement, as State Commissioner et al. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, xcise, for an order revoking and canceling Fourth Department. October 14, 1908.) Action or tax certificate No. 26,202, issued to Nel- by Alice M. Colvin against Sophia Shaw, imLerch. No opinion. Order reversed, with pleaded with others. No opinion. Application and order directed revoking and canceling denied, on the ground that it should be made liquor tax certificate, with $30 costs, in acat Special Term. See section 1299 of the nce with stipulation filed. Code of Civil Procedure and Campbell v. Friedlander, 51 App. Div. 191, 64 N. Y. Supp. 241. re CLEMENT, Excise Com'r. (Supreme t. Appellate Division, Fourth Department. COMPAGNIE COMMERCIALE, Respond24, 1908.) In the matter of the petition ent. v. BRUNN, Appellant. (Supreme Court, aynard N. Clement, as State Commissioner Appellate Division. First Department. Novemscise, for an order revoking and canceling ber 6, 1908.) Action by the Compagnie Comr tax certificate No. 26,233, issued to Han-merciale, etc., against Adolph W. Brunn. A. N. Smith. No opinion. Order reversed, J. Dittenhoefer, for appellant. A. S. Hamlin, costs, and order directed revoking and for respondent. No opinion. Judgment and ling the liquor tax certificate with $30 order affirmed, with costs. in accordance with stipulation filed. -EMENT, Excise Com'r, Respondent, v. SE et al., Appellants. (Supreme Court, llate Division, First Department. Octo23, 1908.) Action by Maynard N. Cleas excise commissioner, against Richard and another. P. A. McManus, for apnts. H. H. Kellogg, for respondent. No Order affirmed, with costs. Order on. Order filed. CONE, Plaintiff, v. LACKAWANNA STEEL CO., Defendant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department. October 7, 1908.) Action by Catherine Cone, as administratrix, etc., against the Lackawanna Steel Company. PER CURIAM. Defendant's exceptions sustained, and motion for new trial granted, with costs to defendant to abide event. Held, that the court erred in excluding evidence of the contract between the corporations, and evidence with reference to the pay roll and the contract and pay check, and then holding and charging the jury that deceased was in defendant's employ when the accident and death occurred. See Kirby v. Lackawanna Steel Company, 109 App. Div. 334, 95 N. Y. Supp. 833. SPRING and KRUSE, JJ., dissent. COOPER, Respondent, v. NEW YORK EDISON CO., Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department. November 6, 1908.) Action by James Cooper against the New York Edison Company. J. R. Oeland, for and 146 New York State Reporter appellant. J. B. Leavitt, for respondent. No, ber 6, 1908.) Action by Eduardo Cupi agains opinion. Judgment and order affirmed, with the Hoffman House, New York. A. D. K costs. Order filed. COSSMAN, Appellant, SILK CO., Respondent. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department. October 16, 1908.) Action by Alfred Cossman against the Chenango Silk Company. PER CURIAM. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. JENKS, J., not voting. land, for appellant. J. B. Stanchfield, for e spondent. No opinion. Judgment afirm. d with costs. Order filed. CURTIS v. CURTIS et al. (Supreme Cour Appellate Division, Third Department. Oct 2, 1908.) Action by Eugene B. Curtis aga Harriet A. Curtis and others. No opinion tions denied, with $10 costs in one motion. S also, 126 App. Div. 590, 110 N. Y. Supp. 6d DANA, Respondent, v. THAW et al, Are lants. (Supreme Court, Appellate Divis First Department. October 16, 1908) Act.c by Charles L. Dana against Mary C. Thaw ar another. H. B. Gayley, for appellants. I Lauterstein, for respondent. No opinion One affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. 0: der filed. See, also, 109 N. Y. Supp. 826. DAVIS, Respondent, v. OLMSTEAD et a Appellants. (Supreme Court, Appellate D. Action by Fitch M. Davis, as administrator. sion, Fourth Department. November 11, 1 against William L. Olmstead, as administrat etc., and others. PER CURIAM. costs. Judgment affirmed, PER CURIAM. costs. Order filed. Judgment affirmed, wi HOUGHTON, J., dissents on the ground COUSE, Respondent, v. DELAWARE & H. damages for delay in installing the ice the counterclaim is sufficiently broad to CO., Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Di-and that the court erred in dismissing the s vision, Third Department. September 17, 1908.) Action by Mina L. Couse, as administratrix, DE LONG et al. v. MERCURY REALT etc., of Scott F. Couse, deceased, against the CO. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division. I Delaware & Hudson Company. No opinion. Department. Judgment and order unanimously affirmed, with Albert W. De Long and others against the M October 16, 1908) Action cury Realty Company. No opinion. M denied, with leave to renew as stated in Motion for resettlement denied. Orders 2nd costs. CRAMER, Appellant, v. KLEIN, Respondent. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department. October 9, 1908.) Action by Esther Cramer against Leontine Klein. No opinion. Motion denied, with $10 costs. See, also, 127 App. Div. 146, 111 N. Y. Supp. 469. CRIMI, Respondent, v. BUFFALO & L. E. TRACTION CO., Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department. Sep tember 23, 1908.) Action by Leonardo Crimi, as administrator, etc., against the Buffalo & Lake Erie Traction Company. No opinion. Motion for reargument denied. Motion for leave to appeal to Court of Appeals denied. CUPI, Appellant, v. HOFFMAN HOUSE, NEW YORK, Respondent. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department. Novem DE MARK et al., Appellants, v. LEVISO Respondent. (Supreme Court, Appellate sion, Second Department. October 9, 1 Action by Frank De Mark and another Isaac Levison. No opinion. Motion dene DEMUTH GLASS MFG. CO., Appellat EARLY et al., Respondents. (Supreme C Appellate Division, Second Department ber 16, 1908.) Action by the Demuth Manufacturing Company against Joseph Early and Charles M. Early, constituting firm of John Early's Sons. No opinion. On reversed on argument, without costs. DIABO, Respondent, v. DIABO, Appe (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth |