Page images
PDF
EPUB

DUNN, Respondent, v. STEWART et al., | ion. Application denied, with $10 costs. Order Appellants. (Supreme Court, Appellate Divi- signed. sion, Fourth Department. January 8, 1913.) Action by Clarence W. Dunn against James C. Stewart and another. No opinion. ment and order affirmed, with costs.

Judg

DURR, Respondent, v. INTERNATIONAL RY. CO., Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department. January 15, 1913.) Action by Abram Durr against the International Railway Company. No opinion. Judgment and order affirmed, with costs.

ERDTMANN, Appellant, v. STACK et al., Respondents. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department. January 17, 1913.) Action by Frederick W. Erdtmann, individually and as trustee, etc., against Thaddeus J. G. Stack and another. No opinion. Motion denied, on condition that appellant perfect his appeal, place the cause on the next calendar, and be ready for argument when reached; otherwise, motion granted, with $10 costs.

EAGLE SAVINGS & LOAN CO. v. COLLINS et al. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department. January 17, 1913.) Action by the Eagle Savings & Loan Company against Ada M. Collins and others. No opinion. Motion denied, on condition that appellant perfect her appeal, place the cause on the next calendar, and be ready for argument when reached; otherwise, motion granted, with $10 costs.

EGAN v. EGAN. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department. January 17, 1913.) Action by Mary II. Egan against William H. Egan. No opinion. Motion granted, with $10 costs. Order filed.

ELLIOTT, Respondent, v. EMPIRE LIMESTONE CO., Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department. January 22, 1913.) Action by Alexander C. Elliott against the Empire Limestone Company. PER CURIAM. Judgment and order affirmed, with costs.

FOOTE, J., not sitting.

EVANS et al. v. PELTA et al. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department. January 31, 1913.) Action by Bertha Evans and others against Charles Pelta and others. No opinion. Order signed. See, also, 146 App. Div. 749, 131 N. Y. Supp. 411.

FARJEON, Appellant, v. INDIAN TERRITORY OIL CO., Respondent. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department. January 24, 1913.) Action by Albert Farjeon against the Indian Territory Oil Company. W. E. Kisselburgh, for appellant. W. F. Parker, for respondent. No opinion. Judgment affirmed, with costs, in 146 App. Div. 23, 130 N. Y. Supp. 532. Order filed. See, also, 151 App. 1 Div. 935, 135 N. Y. Supp. 1111.

In re FEDERAL UNION SURETY CO. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department. January 24, 1913.) In the matter of the application of the Federal Union Surety Company. No opinion. Judgment affirmed. with costs. Order filed. See, also, 73 Misc. Rep. 28, 132 N. Y. Supp. 196; 139 N. Y. Supp. 1122.

ELLISON, Respondent, v. EDELMEYER, Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department. January 17, 1913.) Action by William B. Ellison against Walter S. Edelmeyer. D. Nicholson, of New York City, for appellant. O. B. Goldsmith, of New York City, for respondent. No opinion. Order reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements, and motion denied, with $10 costs. Order filed.

In re FEDERAL UNION SURETY CO. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department. January 24, 1913.) In the matter of the Federal Union Surety Company. No opinion. Order (73 Misc. Rep. 28, 132 N. Y. Supp. 196) affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. Order filed. See, also, 139 N. Y. Supp. 1122.

EQUITABLE TRUST CO. OF NEW YORK v. LEICHTER. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department. January 31, 1913.) Action by the Equitable Trust Company of New York against Solomon Leichter. No opin

FIDELITY MUT. LIFE INS. CO. v. RICHLAND. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department. January 17, 1913.) Action by the Fidelity Mutual Life Insurance Company against Harris Richland. No opinion Motion granted. Order filed. See, also, 138 N. Y. Supp. 763.

(Su

ROGOWSKI v. BRILL (two cases). preme Court, Appellate Division, First Department. February 7, 1913.) Appeal from Appellate Term. Action by Henri Rogowski against Max Brill. From a determination of the Appellate Term (132 N. Y. Supp. 1144) reversing judgments of the Municipal Court in actions on promissory notes, plaintiff appeals. Reversed. See, also, 153 App. Div. 894, 137 N. Y. Supp. 1140. Swan & Moore, of New York City (Joseph R. Swan, of New York City, of counsel), for appellant. S. Charles Sugarman, of New York City (M. Spencer Bevins, of New York City, of counsel), for respondent.

FLOCKER, Respondent, v. HUDSON & M. R. CO., Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department. January 24, 1913.) Action by Ludwig Flocker, as administrator, against the Hudson & Manhattan Railroad Company. B. L. Pettigrew of New York City, for appellant. M. L. Heidenheimer, of New York City, for respondent. No opinion. Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. Order filed. See, also, 149 App. Div. 942, 133 N. Y. Supp. 1121.

FORCIAREZ, Respondent, v. AMERICAN GYPSUM CO., Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department. January 15, 1913.) Action by Josephine Forciarez, as administratrix, etc., against the American Gypsum Company. No opinion. Judgment and order affirmed, with costs.

FRENCH, Respondent, v. WRAY, Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department. January 16, 1913.) Action by Harma D. French, as committee of the person and property of William A. Cook, an incompetent person, against Emma Mann Wray. No opinMotion for reargument (139 N. Y. Supp. 339) denied.

PER CURIAM. These are two appeals, argued together, from determinations of the Appellate Term reversing judgments of the Municipal Court in actions on promissory notes brought by the payee against the indorser. The cases have twice been appealed to the Appellate Term and twice reversed, and have been tried by three different Municipal Court judges, who have every time decided in favor of the plaintiff. The defense is that the defendant was an accommodation indorser for the benefit of the plaintiff. The trial court found that he was an indorser for the benefit of the maker. · Plaintiff is a printer. The maker of the note was the president of a company which pub-ion. lished a newspaper. A careful examination of the facts presented by the record has convinced us that these notes were given for a good consideration, and that the indorsement was obtained in the interests of the publishers to procure its printing by the plaintiff, the printer, and therefore that the judgment of the trial court was right, and the conclusion reached by the Appellate Term erroneous. It follows, therefore, that the determination appealed from should be reversed and the judgments of the Municipal Court reinstated, with costs to the appellant in all courts.

FIRST NAT. BANK OF AMITYVILLE v. THOMAS KELLS SONS CO. et al. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department. January 10, 1913.) Action by the First National Bank of Amityville against the Thomas Kells Sons Company and others. Defendant Louis H. Strouse, assignee, appeals.

PER CURIAM. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements, upon the ground that the assignee did not disclose the facts upon which rested the defense that plaintiff took the check with notice that it was issued without authority, but without prejudice to a new application to Special Term by the appellant, on papers which disclose facts which prima facie support his defense.

FITZGERALD, Appellant, v. BROOKLYN UNION ELEVATED R. CO., Respondent, (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department. January 17, 1913.) Action by John Fitzgerald against the Brooklyn Union Elevated Railroad Company. No opinion. Judgment and order unanimously affirmed, with

costs.

FRENCH, Respondent, v. WRAY, Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department. January 16, 1913.) Action by Harma D. French, as committee, etc., of William A. Cook, an incompetent person, against Emma Mann Wray.

PER CURIAM. Decision (139 N. Y. Supp. 339) amended, so as to read as follows: "Judg ment and order reversed on law and facts, and new trial granted, with costs to appellant to abide event. The specific findings of fact of . which this court disapproves as against the weight of evidence are the findings that the defendant's land was included in the descriptions of the deeds under which the plaintiff claims title, that the boundary line between the plaintiff's property and the defendant's was not practically located north of the lands in question, and that the defendant had not acquired title to said lands by adverse possession. All concur; LYON, J., in result."

In re FRINDEL. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department. January 17, 1913.) In the matter of Benjamin Frindel, an attorney.

PER CURIAM. Further affidavits may be submitted by the petitioner or the Bar Association on or before January 24, 1913, upon the question whether the respondent has abstained from practice during the period of two years. See, also, 142 App. Div. 901, 127 N. Y. Supp. 1121.

In re FRINDEL. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department. January 28.

DUNN, Respondent, v. STEWART et al., Appellants. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division. Fourth Department. January 8, 1913.) Action by Clarence W. Dunn against James C. Stewart and another. No opinion. Judgment and order affirmed, with costs.

DURR, Respondent, v. INTERNATIONAL RY. CO., Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department. January 15, 1913.) Action by Abram Durr against the International Railway Company. No opinion. Judgment and order affirmed, with costs.

ion. Application denied, with $10 costs. Order signed.

ERDTMANN, Appellant, v. STACK et al, Respondents. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department. January 17, 1913.) Action by Frederick W. Erdtmann, individually and as trustee, etc., against Thaddeus J. G. Stack and another. No opinion. Motion denied, on condition that appellant perfect his appeal, place the cause on the next calendar, and be ready for argument when reached; otherwise, motion granted, with $10 costs.

EAGLE SAVINGS & LOAN CO. v. COLLINS et al. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department. January 17, 1913.) Action by the Eagle Savings & Loan Company against Ada M. Collins and others. No opinion. Motion denied, on condition that appellant perfect her appeal, place the cause on the next calendar, and be ready for argument when reached; otherwise, motion granted, with $10

costs.

EGAN v. EGAN. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department. January 17, 1913.) Action by Mary H. Egan against William H. Egan. No opinion. Motion granted, with $10 costs. Order filed.

ELLIOTT, Respondent, v. EMPIRE LIMESTONE CO., Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department. January 22, 1913.) Action by Alexander C. Elliott against the Empire Limestone Company. PER CURIAM. Judgment and order affirmed, with costs.

FOOTE, J., not sitting.

EVANS et al. v. PELTA et al. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department. January 31, 1913.) Action by Bertha Evans and others against Charles Pelta and others. No opinion. Order signed. See, also, 146 App. Div. 749, 131 N. Y. Supp. 411.

FARJEON, Appellant, v. INDIAN TERRITORY OIL CO., Respondent. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department. January 24, 1913.) Action by Albert Farjeon against the Indian Territory Oil Company. W. E. Kisselburgh, for appellant. W. F. Parker, for respondent. No opinion. Judgment affirmed, with costs, in 146 App. Div. 23, 130 N. Y. Supp. 532. Order filed. See, also, 151 App. Div. 935, 135 N. Y. Supp. 1111.

In re FEDERAL UNION SURETY CO. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First De partment. January 24, 1913.) In the matter of the application of the Federal Union Surety Company. No opinion. Judgment affirmed, with costs. Order filed. See, also, 73 Misc. Rep. 28, 132 N. Y. Supp. 196; 139 N. Y. Supp. 1122.

ELLISON, Respondent, v. EDELMEYER, In re FEDERAL UNION SURETY CO. Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Divi (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Desion, First Department. January 17, 1913.) | partment. January 24, 1913.) In the matter Action by William B. Ellison against Walter of the Federal Union Surety Company. No S. Edelmeyer. D. Nicholson, of New York City, opinion. Order (73 Misc. Rep. 28, 132 N. Y. for appellant. O. B. Goldsmith, of New York Supp. 196) affirmed, with $10 costs and disCity, for respondent. No opinion. Order rebursements. Order filed. See, also, 139 N. Y. versed, with $10 costs and disbursements, and Supp. 1122. motion denied, with $10 costs. Order filed.

FIDELITY MUT. LIFE INS. CO. v. RICHLAND. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department. January 17, 1913.) Action by the Fidelity Mutual Life Insurance Company against Harris Richland. No opinion Motion granted. Order filed. See, also, 138 N.

EQUITABLE TRUST CO. OF NEW YORK
V. LEICHTER. (Supreme Court, Appellate
Division, First Department. January 31, 1913.)
Action by the Equitable Trust Company of
New York against Solomon Leichter. No opin-Y. Supp. 763.

ROGOWSKI v. BRILL (two cases). (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department. February 7, 1913.) Appeal from Appellate Term. Action, by Henri Rogowski against Max Brill. From a determination of the Appellate Term (132 N. Y. Supp. 1144) reversing judgments of the Municipal Court in actions on promissory notes, plaintiff appeals. Reversed. See, also, 153 App. Div. 894, 137 N. Y. Supp. 1140. Swan & Moore, of New York City (Joseph R. Swan, of New York City, of counsel), for appellant. S. Charles Sugarman, of New York City (M. Spencer Bevins, of New York City, of counsel), for respondent.

PER CURIAM. These are two appeals, argued together, from determinations of the Appellate Term reversing judgments of the Municipal Court in actions on promissory notes brought by the payee against the indorser. The cases have twice been appealed to the Appellate Term and twice reversed, and have been tried by three different Municipal Court judges, who have every time decided in favor of the plaintiff. The defense is that the defendant was an accommodation indorser for the benefit of the plaintiff. The trial court found that he was an indorser for the benefit of the maker. Plaintiff is a printer. The maker of the note was the president of a company which published a newspaper. A careful examination of the facts presented by the record has convinced us that these notes were given for a good consideration, and that the indorsement was obtained in the interests of the publishers to procure its printing by the plaintiff, the printer, and therefore that the judgment of the trial court was right, and the conclusion reached by the Appellate Term erroneous. It follows, therefore, that the determination appealed from should be reversed and the judgments of the Municipal Court reinstated, with costs to the appellant in all courts.

FIRST NAT. BANK OF AMITYVILLE v. THOMAS KELLS SONS CO. et al. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department. January 10, 1913.) Action by the First National Bank of Amityville against the Thomas Kells Sons Company and others. Defendant Louis H. Strouse, assignee, appeals.

PER CURIAM. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements, upon the ground that the assignee did not disclose the facts upon which rested the defense that plaintiff took the check with notice that it was issued without authority, but without prejudice to a new application to Special Term by the appellant, on papers which disclose facts which prima facie support his defense.

FITZGERALD. Appellant, v. BROOKLYN UNION ELEVATED R. CO., Respondent. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department. January 17, 1913.) Action by John Fitzgerald against the Brooklyn Union Elevated Railroad Company. No opinion. Judgment and order unanimously affirmed, with costs.

FLOCKER, Respondent, v. HUDSON & M. R. CO., Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department. January 24, 1913.) Action by Ludwig Flocker, as administrator, against the Hudson & Manhattan Railroad Company. B. L. Pettigrew of New York City, for appellant. M. L. Heidenheimer, of New York City, for respondent. No opinion. Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. Order filed. See, also, 149 App. Div. 942, 133 N. Y. Supp. 1121.

FORCIAREZ, Respondent, v. AMERICAN GYPSUM CO., Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department. January 15, 1913.) Action by Josephine Forciarez, as administratrix, etc., against the American Gypsum Company. No opinion. Judgment and order affirmed, with costs.

FRENCH, Respondent, v. WRAY, Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department. January 16, 1913.) Action by Harma D. French, as committee of the person and property of William A. Cook, an incompetent person, against Emma Mann Wray. No opinion. Motion for reargument (139 N. Y. Supp. 339) denied.

FRENCH, Respondent, v. WRAY, Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department. January 16, 1913.) Action by Harma D. French, as committee, etc., of William A. Cook, an incompetent person, against Emma Mann Wray.

PER CURIAM. Decision (139 N. Y. Supp. 339) amended, so as to read as follows: "Judg ment and order reversed on law and facts, and new trial granted, with costs to appellant to abide event. The specific findings of fact of which this court disapproves as against the weight of evidence are the findings that the defendant's land was included in the descriptions of the deeds under which the plaintiff claims title, that the boundary line between the plaintiff's property and the defendant's was not practically located north of the lands in question, and that the defendant had not acquired title to said lands by adverse possession. All concur; LYON, J., in result.'

In re FRINDEL._(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department. January 17, 1913.) In the matter of Benjamin Frindel, an attorney.

PER CURIAM. Further affidavits may be submitted by the petitioner or the Bar Association on or before January 24, 1913, upon the question whether the respondent has abstained from practice during the period of two years. See, also, 142 App. Div. 901, 127 N. Y. Supp. 1121.

In re FRINDEL. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department. January 28.

[blocks in formation]

GODLEY v. CRANDALL & GODLEY CO. et al. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department. January 31, 1913.) Action by Elizabeth McM. Godley against the Crandall & Godley Company and others.

PER CURIAM. Motion granted, upon de fendant executors giving additional bond, and proceedings stayed until determination of apSettle order on no

GENESEE FRUIT CO., Respondent, v. EM-peal to Court of Appeals. PIRE STATE PICKLING CO., Appellant. tice. See memorandum per curiam. See, also, (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth De- 139 N. Y. Supp. 236. partment. January 22, 1913.) Action by the Genesee Fruit Company against the Empire State Pickling Company.

GOLDBERG, Appellant, v. BEINLICH, RePER CURIAM. Judgment and order affirm-spondent. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division. ed, with costs. First Department. February 7, 1913.) Action by Clara Goldberg against Paul Beinlich. J. A. Hilton, of New York City, for appellant. C. S. Petrasch, of New York City, for respond

FOOTE, J., not sitting.

GEORGE E. LOEFFLER LAND & IM-ent. No opinion. Judgment affirmed, with PROVEMENT CO. v. ENGLAR. (Supreme costs, on 145 App. Div. 912, 130 N. Y. Supp.

Court, Appellate Division, First Department.
January 31, 1913.) Action by the George E.
Loeffler Land & Improvement Company against
D. Roger Englar. No opinion. Application de-
nied, with $10 costs. Order signed.

GERLACH-BARKLOW CO., Respondent, v. HALEY, Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department. December 30, 1912.) Action by the Gerlach-Barklow Company against John W. Haley. No opinion. Judgment unanimously affirmed, with costs.

GIBSON, Appellant, v. BARNUM, Respondent. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department. December 30, 1912.) Action by Malcolm Gibson against Lawrence Barnum. No opinion. Interlocutory judgment affirmed, with costs, with usual leave to plaintiff to withdraw demurrer and answer, upon payment of

1112.

Order filed.

GOTTHELF v. KRULEWITCH. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department. January 17, 1913.) Action by Samuel Gotthelf against Julius Krulewitch. No opinion. Motion denied, with $10 costs. Order filed. See, also, 138 N. Y. Supp. 756.

GRAHAM, Appellant, v. GAMMACK, R spondent. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department. January 22, 1913) Action by William E. Graham, as administrator, etc., against John Gammack. No opinion. Judgment affirmed, with costs.

GRAVES, Respondent, v. VILLAGE OF NEW BERLIN, Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department. De

« PreviousContinue »