and overruled such demurrer in an action for deceit. The following questions were certified: "First. Does the complaint state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action? Second. Is the partial defense contained in the answer of the defendant John R. Bennett insufficient in law upon the face thereof?" See, also, 129 N. Y. Supp. 1138. Nathan Ottinger, for appellants. Thomas D. Adams, for respondent. PER CURIAM. Order of Appellate Division reversed and interlocutory judgment affirmed, with costs in both courts, on dissenting opinion of Miller, J., below, and both questions certified answered in the affirmative. CULLEN, C. J., and HAIGHT, VANN, WERNER, WILLARD BARTLETT, HISCOCK, and CHASE, JJ., concur. PAKAS, Respondent, v. CLARKE, Appellant. (Court of Appeals of New York. Oct. 3, 1911.) Appeal from so much of a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department (136 App. Div. 492, 121 N. Y. Supp. 192), entered March 12, 1910, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a decision of the court on trial at Special Term, as awards costs to appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Third Judicial De partment (138 App. Div. 638, 122 N. Y. Supp. 740), entered May, 11, 1910, reversing a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a decision of the Warren County Court after trial without a jury and granting a new trial in an action to compel specific performance of a contract to purchase real property. The motion was made upon the ground that the Court of Appeals had no jurisdiction to entertain the appeal. Robert Imrie, for the motion. H. A Howard, opposed. PER CURIAM. Motion granted on payment, within 20 days, of costs of appeal and $10 costs of motion. PEASE, Respondent, v. PENNSYLVANIA R. CO., Appellant. (Court of Appeals of New York. Oct. 31, 1911.) Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Fourth Judicial Department (137 App. Div. 458, 929, 122 N. Y. Supp. 784, 787), entered March 16, 1910, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict in an action to recover for personal injuries alleggence of defendant. See, also 199 N. Y. 555. 93. Ernest C. Whitbeck and Frank Rumsey, for appellant. George D. Forsyth, for respondent. ed to have been sustained through the nezli the plaintiff. See, also, 137 App. Div. 921, 122 PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with costs. CULLEN, C. J., and GRAY, VANN, WERNER, WILLARD BARTLETT, HISCOCK, and CHASE, JJ., concur. PER CURIAM. costs. Judgment affirmed, with WILLARD' BARTLETT, HISCOCK, CHASE, CULLEN, C. J., and VANN, WERNER, and COLLIN, JJ., concur. PARIS et al. v. LAWYERS' TITLE INS. PEOPLE, Appellant, v. BROWN et al., Re& TRUST CO. (Court of Appeals of New spondents. (Court of Appeals of New York. York. Nov. 28, 1911.) Motion to dismiss an June 6, 1911.) Motion by respondent Taub to appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Divi- dismiss an appeal from an order of the Appelsion of the Supreme Court in the Second Ju- late Division of the Supreme Court in the First dicial Department (141 App. Div. 866, 126 N. Y. Judicial Department (140 App. Div. 591, 125 N. Supp. 753), entered December 30, 1910, affirm-Y. Supp. 793), entered November 18, 1910. ing a judgment in favor of respondents herein, which reversed a judgment of the court of Genentered upon a decision of the court on trial at eral Sessions of the Peace of the county of New Special Term in an action to foreclose a mort- York rendered upon a verdict convicting the degage wherein it was decided that a certain me- fendants of the crime of forgery in the third dechanic's lien had priority over a mortgage held gree and directed their discharge from custody. by the appellant. The motion was made upon The motion was made upon the ground that the the ground that the appeal was frivolous; no Court of Appeals had no jurisdiction to enterquestion of law being involved and said appeal tain the appeal. See also, 141 App. Div. 638. being taken for purposes of delay only. Abra- 126 N. Y. Supp. 322. Gustavus A. Rogers, for ham H. Spigelgass, for the motion. Philip S. the motion. Charles S. Whitman, Dist. Atty. Dean, opposed. (Robert C. Taylor, of counsel), opposed. PER CURIAM. Motion denied, with $10 costs. PATRICK, Respondent, v. VICTOR KNITTING MILLS CO., Appellant. (Court of Appeals of New York. May 30, 1911.) Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Third Judicial Department (134 App. Div. 910, 118 N. Y. Supp. 1129), entered September 30, 1909, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict in an action to recover for personal injuries alleged to have been sustained by plaintiff through the negligence of defendant, his employer. Edwin Countryman and Henry A. Strong, for appellant. John H. Gleason and Walter H. Wertime, for respondent. PER CURIAM. Judgment aflirmed, with costs. CULLEN, C. J., and HAIGHT, WERNER, WILLARD BARTLETT, CHASE, and COL LIN, JJ., concur. IIISCOCK, J., absent. PAUL, Appellant, v. SWEARS, Respondent. (Court of Appeals of New York. Dec. 5, 1911.) PER CURIAM. Motion granted, and appeal dismissed as to respondent Taub. PEOPLE, Respondent, v. DARRAGH, Appellant. (Court of Appeals of New York. Oct. 3, 1911.) Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department (141 App. Div. 408, 126 N. Y. Supp. 522), entered December 30, 1910, which affirmed a judgment of the Court of General Sessions of the Peace in the county of New York rendered upon a verdict convicting the defendant of the crime of manslaughter in the first degree. Charles A. Flammer, Ralph M. Frink, and Edward F. Flammer, for appellant. Charles S. Whitman, Dist. Atty. (Robert C. Taylor, of counsel), for the People. PER CURIAM. Judgment of conviction affirmed. CULLEN, C. J., and GRAY, HAIGHT. VANN, WERNER, HISCOCK, and COLLIN, JJ., concur. PEOPLE, Respondent, v. GRACEFFO, Anpellant. (Court of Appeals of New York. May Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the, PER CURIAM. Order affirmed. legany County Court rendered upon a verdict convicting the defendant of the crime of unlawfully practicing medicine. Lee Fassett, B. B. Ackerman, and Eldyn Reynolds, for appellant. James T. Ward, for respondent. PER CURIAM. Judgment of conviction affirmed, on the authority of People v. Allcutt, 117 App. Div. 546, 102 N. Y. Supp. 678, affirmed 189 N. Y. 317, 81 N. E. 1171. CULLEN, C. J., and GRAY, HAIGHT, VANN, WERNER, HISCOCK, and COLLIN, JJ., concur. PER CURIAM. Motion denied, without costs. PEOPLE, Respondent, v. NEWCOMB, Appellant. (Court of Appeals of New York. Nov. PEOPLE, Respondent, v. McNUTT, Appel-28, 1911.) Motion to amend remittitur. See lant. (Court of Appeals of New York. May 201 N. Y. 151, 94 N. E. 610. 30, 1911.) Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department (133 App. Div. 944, 118 N. Y. Supp. 1131), entered July 13, 1909, which affirmed a judgment of the Court of General Sessions of the Peace in the county of New York rendered upon a verdict convicting the defendant of the crime of grand larceny in the first degree. Reuben Peckham and James W. Osborne, for appellant. Charles S. Whitman, Dist. Atty. (Robert S. Johnstone, of counsel), for the People. PER CURIAM. Judgment of conviction af firmed. CULLEN, C. J., and HAIGHT, WERNER, WILLARD BARTLETT, HISCOCK, CHASE, and COLLIN, JJ., concur. PEOPLE, Respondent, v. MANGANO, Appellant. (Court of Appeals of New York. Nov. 21, 1911.) Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, rendered November 23, 1909, at a Trial Term for the county of New York, upon a verdict convicting the defendant of the crime of murder in the first degree. George H. Taylor, Jr., Francis S. McAvoy, and Samuel Feldman, for appellant. Charles S. Whitman, Dist. Atty. (Robert C. Taylor, of counsel), for the People. PER CURIAM. Judgment of conviction affirmed. CULLEN, C. J., and GRAY, HAIGHT, VANN, WERNER, CHASE, and COLLIN, JJ., concur. June PEOPLE, Respondent, v. MILLER, Appellant. (Court of Appeals of New York. 16. 1911.) Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department (143 App. Div. 251, 128 N. Y. Supp. 549), entered March 17, 1911, which reversed an order of the Court of General Sessions of the Peace in the county of New York granting a motion in arrest of judgment after a verdict convicting the defendant of the_crime of unlawful entry as a second offense. Lorlys Elton Rogers, for appellant. Charles S. Whitman, Dist. Atty. (Robert S. Johnstone, of counsel), for the People. PER CURIAM. Order affirmed, on opinion of SCOTT, J., below. CULLEN, C. J., and GRAY, HAIGHT. WERNER, WILLARD BARTLETT, CHASE, and COLLIN, JJ., concur. PEOPLE, Respondent, v. MULFORD, Appellant. (Court of Appeals of New York. June 16, 1911.) Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Fourth Judicial Department (140 App. Div. 716, 125 N. Y. Supp. 680), entered November PEOPLE, Respondent, v. TEELING, Appellant. (Court of Appeals of New York. Oct. 3, 1911.) Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Third Judicial Department (140 App. Div. 945, 125 N. Y. Supp. 1137), entered December 7, 1910, which affirmed a judgment of the Albany County Court rendered upon a verdict convicting the defendant of the crime of violating section 986 of the penal law, in recording and registering bets and wagers. Thomas F. Powers, for appellant. Rollin B. Sanford, Dist. Atty., for the People. PER CURIAM. Judgment of convictior affirmed. CULLEN, C. J., and GRAY, HAIGHT, VANN, WERNER, HISCOCK, and COLLIN, JJ., concur. PEOPLE ex rel. ABRAHAM et al., Respondents, v. PERLEY et al., State Board of Tax Com'rs, Appellants. (Court of Apfrom an order of the Appellate Division of peals of New York. June 16, 1911.) Appeal the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department (143 App. Div. 915, 127 N. Y. Supp. 1137), entered February 20, 1911, which affirmed an order of Special Term (67 Misc. Rep. 471, 123 N. Y. Supp, 436), vacating an assessment against the relators upon a vault or substructure maintained under a street in the borough of Brooklyn. Thomas Carmody, Atty. Gen. (Henry Selden Bacon, of counsel), for appellants. Edward M. Grout, Paul Grout, and Frank R. Greene, for respondents. PER CURIAM. Order affirmed, with costs. CULLEN. C. J., and GRAY, HAIGHT, VANN, WERNER, HISCOCK, and COLLIN, JJ., concur. PEOPLE ex rel. ALDEN SPEARES SONS CO., Appellant, v. PURDY et al., Com'rs of Taxes and Assessments, Respondents. (Court of Appeals of New York. June 13, 1911.) Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department (143 App. Div. 929, 128 N. Y. Supp. 1139), entered March 17, 1911, which affirmed an order of Special Term dismissing a writ of certiorari and confirming an assessment upon the capital stock of the relator. Charles H. Luscomb, for appellant. Archibald R. Watson, Corp. Counsel (Curtis A. Peters and William H. King, of counsel), for respondents. PER CURIAM. Order affirmed, with costs. CULLEN, C. J., and GRAY. HAIGHT, WERNER, WILLARD BARTLETT, CHASE, PEOPLE ex rel. BARNET, Appellant. v. FOSDICK, Com'r of Accounts, Respondent. (Court of Appeals of New York. Oct. 17, 1911.) Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department (142 App. Div. 935, 127 N. Y. Supp. 1137), entered January 13, 1911, which affirmed an order of Special Term denying a motion for a peremptory writ of mandamus to compel the defendant to reinstate the relator in the position of accountant in the office of the commissioner of accounts of the city of New York. Ira E. Miller, Leon Levy, and Harry Greenberg, for appellant. Archibald R. Watson, Corp. Counsel (Theodore Connoly and Clarence L. Barber, of counsel), for respondent. PER CURIAM. Order affirmed, with costs. CULLEN, C. J., and HAIGHT, VANN, WERNER, WILLARD BARTLETT, HIS COCK, and CHASE, JJ., concur. PEOPLE ex rel. BARONE v. FOX, Warden of the Workhouse. (Court of Appeals of New York. June 16, 1911.) Appeal. by permission, from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department (144 App. Div. 611. 129 N. Y. Supp. 646), entered May 16, 1911, which reversed an order of Special Term (69 Misc. Rep. 400, 127 N. Y. Supp. 484), sustaining a writ of habeas corpus and discharging the relator from custody, dismissed the proceeding, and remanded the relator to custody. The proceeding was brought to determine the constitutionality of section 79 of chapter 659 of the Laws of 1910, providing for a medical examination of prostitutes and their commitment to a public hospital if found to be afflictBertha Remed with any venereal disease. baugh, for appellant. Charles S. Whitman, Dist. Atty. (Robert S. Johnstone, of counsel), for respondent. PER CURIAM. Order reversed and relator discharged on dissenting opinion of Clarke, J., below. CULLEN, C. J., and HAIGHT, WERNER, WILLARD BARTLETT, CHASE, and COLLIN, JJ., concur. GRAY, J., dissents on opinion of INGRAHAM, P. J., below. PEOPLE ex rel. BROWNING, KING & CO. v. STOVER et al., Com'rs of Parks. (Court of Appeals of New York. Dec. 5, 1911.) Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department (145 App. Div. 259, 130 N. Y. Supp. 92), entered July 1, 1911, which reversed an order of Special Term denying a motion for a peremptory writ of mandamus to compel defendants to proceed with the removal of incumbrances on certain streets of the city of New York, consisting of show windows, cornices, and stoops attached to a certain building in said city, and granted said motion. See, also, 130 N. Y. Supp. 1125. Eugene D. Boyer, Charles Strauss, and Peter Zucker, for appellants. Charles P. Northrop, for respondent Browning, King & Co. PER CURIAM. Order affirmed, with costs. CULLEN, C. J., and HAIGHT, WERNER, WILLARD BARTLETT, HISCOCK, CHASE, and COLLIN, JJ., concur. PEOPLE ex rel. BUFFALO & LAKE ERIE TRACTION CO., Respondent, v. WOODBURY et al., Board of Tax Com'rs., Appellants. (Court of Appeals of New York. Oct. 24, 1911.) Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Third entered June 15, 1911, which annulled, on certiorari, a determination of the State Board of Tax Commissioners as to the relative portion of a mortgage covering property both within and without the state, taxable under the mortgage tax law (Consol. Laws 1909, c. 60). Thomas Carmody, Atty. Gen. (Irving D. Vann, of counsel), for appellants. Daniel J. Kenefick and Howard S. Jones, for respondent. PER CURIAM. Order affirmed, with costs, on opinion of HOUGHTON, J., below. CULLEN, C. J., and VANN, WERNER, WILLARD BARTLETT, HISCOCK, CHASE, and COLLIN, JJ., concur. PEOPLE ex rel. FOREST, Appellant, v. WILLIAMS, State Engineer and Surveyor. (Court of Appeals of New York. Oct. 17, 1911.) Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Fourth Judicial Department (140 App. Div. 723, 125 N. Y. Supp. 583), entered November 16, 1910, which affirmed an order of Special Term denying a motion for a peremptory writ of mandamus to compel defendant to reinstate the relator in the position of axeman in the office of the division engineer at Rochester. Albert C. Olp, for appellant. Thomas Carmody, Atty. Gen. (Wilber W. Chambers, of counsel), for respondent. PEOPLE ex PALMITER, rel. LANGE, Appellant, Police Officer, Respondent. June 13, (Court of Appeals of New York. 1911.) Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department (144 App. Div. 84. 128 N. Y. Supp. 1140), entered April 13. 1911, which affirmed an order of Special Term (71 Misc. Rep. 158, 128 N. Y. Supp. 426) dismissing a writ of habeas corpus and remanding the relator to the custody of the defendant. The proceeding was brought to test the constitutionality of the ordinance regulating the sale of theater tickets by ticket speculators in the public streets. Louis Marshall, for appellant. Archibald R. Watson, Corp. Counsel (Terence Farley and Louis H. Hablo, of counsel), for respondent. PER CURIAM. Order affirmed, with costs. CULLEN, C. J., and GRAY, HAIGHT, WERNER, WILLARD BARTLETT, CHASE, and COLLIN, JJ., concur. PEOPLE ex rel. LISK, Appellant, v. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF CITY OF NEW YORK, Respondent. (Court of Appeals of New York. Oct. 24, 1911.) Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department (143 App. Div. 932, 128 N. Y. Supp. 1140), entered March 24, 1911, which dismissed a writ of certiorari and affirmed the proceedings of defendant in dismissing the relator from the position of inspector of fuel in the bureau of supplies of the department of education of the city of New York. William Armstrong, for appellant. Archibald R. Watson, Corp. Counsel (Terence Farley, and Charles McIntyre, of counsel), for respondent. PER CURIAM. Order affirmed, without costs. CULLEN, C. J., and HAIGHT, WERNER, WILLARD BARTLETT. HISCOCK, and PEOPLE ex rel. LISK, Appellant, V. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF CITY OF NEW YORK, Respondent. (Court of Appeals of New York. Nov. 28, 1911.) PER CURIAM. Motion for reargument de: nied, with $10 costs. See 203 N. Y. —, 96 N. E. 1126. Henry Bacon, for appellant. M. N. Kane and PER CURIAM. Order affirmed, with costs. PER CURIAM. Motion for reargument denied, with $10 costs. See 203 N. Y. 167, 96 N. E. 431. See, also, 131 N. Y. Supp. 1137. PEOPLE ex rel. NEW YORK CENT. & H. R. R. CO., Appellant, v. WOODBURY et PEOPLE ex rel. MANHATTAN-HUDSON al., State Board of Tax Com'rs, et al., RespondREALTY CO., Appellant, V. WILLIAMS, ents. (Court of Appeals of New York. Nov. 28, Comptroller, Respondent. (Court of Appeals 1911.) of New York. Oct. 24, 1911.) Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Third Judicial Department (143 App. Div. 972, 127 N. Y. Supp. 1138), entered May 5, 1911, which confirmed, on certiorari, the proceedings of defendant in assessing a franchise tax against the relator. Alfred B. Thacher, for appellant. Thomas Carmody, Atty. Gen. (Irving D. Vann, of counsel), for respondent. PER CURIAM. Order affirmed, with costs. CULLEN, C. J., and HAIGHT, VANN, WERNER, WILLARD BARTLETT, HISCOCK, and CHASE, JJ., concur. PEOPLE ex rel. MATTHEWS et al., Respondents, v. PERLEY et al., State Board of Tax Com'rs, Appellants. (Court of Appeals of New York. June 16, 1911.) Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department (143 App. Div. 915, 127 N. Y. Supp. 1138), entered February 20, 1911, which affirmed an order of Special Term vacating an assessment against the relators upon a vault or substructure maintained under a street in the borough of Brooklyn. Thomas Carmody, Atty. Gen. (Henry Selden Bacon, of counsel), for appellants. Edward M. Grout, Paul Grout, and Frank R. Greene, for respondents. PER CURIAM. Order affirmed, with costs. CULLEN. C. J., and GRAY, HAIGHT, VANN, WERNER, HISCOCK, and COLLIN, JJ., concur. PEOPLE ex rel. MENCKE, Appellant, v. BAKER, Police Com'r, Respondent. (Court of Appeals of New York. Oct. 24, 1911.) Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department (143 App. Div. 946, 127 N. Y. Supp. 1138), entered March 10, 1911, which affirmed the determination of the police commissioner of the city of New York in dismissing the relator from the position of patrolman in the police department of said city. See, also, 131 N. Y. Supp. 1136. Jacob Rouss and Louis J. Grant, for appellant. Archibald R. Watson, Corporation Counsel (James D. Bell, of counsel), for respondent. PER CURIAM. Order affirmed, with costs, on authority of People ex rel. McCormack v. McClave. 55 Hun, 609, 8 N. Y. Supp. 504; affirmed, 121 N. Y. 710, 24 N. E. 1101. CULLEN, C. J., and HAIGHT, WERNER, WILLARD BARTLETT, HISCOCK, and CHASE, JJ., concur. VANN, J., absent. PEOPLE ex rel. NEWBURGH NEWS PRINTING & PUBLISHING CO., Appellant, v. BOARD OF SUP'RS OF ORANGE COUNTY, Respondent. (Court of Appeals of New York. Oct. 24, 1911.) Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department (140 App. Div. 227, 125 N. Y. Supp. 105), entered November 25, 1910, which quashed a writ of certiorari and affirmed the proceedings of the PEOPLE ex rel. QUEENS COUNTY WATER CO., Appellant, v. WOODBURY et al., State Board of Tax Com'rs, Respondents. (Court of Appeals of New York. June 16, 1911.) Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department (143 App. Div. 618, 128 N. Y. Supp. 522), entered March 17, 1911, which affirmed an order of Special Term (67 Misc. Rep. 490, 123 N. Y. Supp. 599), reducing an assessment for purposes of taxation against the special franchise of relator. Henry de Forest Baldwin, for appellant Queens County Water Co. Archibald R. Watson, Corp. Counsel (Curtis A. Peters and Addison B. Scoville, of counsel), for appellant City of New York. Thomas Carmody, Atty. Gen. (C. R. McSparren, of counsel), for respondents. PER CURIAM. Order affirmed, with costs. WERNER, WILLARD BARTLETT, CHASE, CULLEN, C. J., and GRAY, HAIGHT, and COLLIN, JJ., concur. Appellant, V. PEOPLE ex rel. REID, BINGHAM, Police Commissioner, Respondent. (Court of Appeals of New York. Oct. 17, 1911.) Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department (143 App. Div. 928, 128 N. Y. Supp. 1140), entered March 10, 1911, which dismissed a writ of certiorari and affirmed the proceedings of the defendant in dismissing the relator from the police force of the city of New York. See, also, 144 App. Div. 899, 129 N. Y. Supp. 1141. Gilbert D. Lamb, for appellant. Archibald R. Watson, Corp. Counsel (Terence Farley and Harry Crone, of counsel), for respondent. PER CURIAM. Order affirmed, with costs. CULLEN, C. J., and HAIGHT, VANN, WERNER, WILLARD BARTLETT, HISCOCK, and CHASE, JJ., concur. PEOPLE ex rel. STEBBINS, Appellant, v. PURDY et al., Commissioners of Taxes and Assessments, Respondents. (Court of Appeals of New York. Oct. 24, 1911.) Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department (144 App. Div. 361, 129 N. Y. Supp. 273), entered May 5, 1911, which reversed an order of Special Term vacating an assessment against personal property of relator and dismissed the proceeding. Theodore L. Bailey, for appellant. Archibald R. Watson, Corp. Counsel (Curtis A. Peters and Eugene Fay, of counsel), for respondents. PER CURIAM. Order affirmed, with costs. CULLEN, C. J., and HAIGHT, VANN, WERNER, WILLARD BARTLETT, HISCOCK, and CHASE, JJ., concur. PEOPLE ex rel. WOOD, Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH OF CITY OF 1 of New York. June 13, 1911.) Appeal from an appeal, by permission, from a judgment of an order of the Appellate Division of the Su- the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in preme Court in the First Judicial Department the First Judicial Department (138 App. Div. (144 App. Div. 628, 129 N. Y. Supp. 255), en- 907, 123 N. Y. Supp. 1138), entered May 23. tered May 5, 1911, which dismissed a writ of 1910, affirming a judgment in favor of plain:if certiorari and affirmed the proceedings of the entered upon a verdict in an action to redefendant in removing the relator from the posi- cover for personal injuries alleged to have been tion of assistant registrar of records in the sustained by plaintiff through the negligence of department of health. George M. Pinney, Jr., defendants, his employers. The motion was and Warren C. Van Slyke, for appellant. Arch- made upon the ground that the affirmance by ibald R. Watson. Corp. Counsel (Terence Far- the Appellate Division was unanimous and the ley and John F. O'Brien, of counsel), for exceptions frivolous. Julius H. Cohn, for the respondent. motion. Herbert Noble, opposed. PLUMB, Appellant, v. LYELL AVENUE LUMBER CO., Respondent. (Court of Appeals of New York. June 16, 1911.) Appeal, by permission, from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Fourth Judicial Department (129 N. Y. Supp. 1142), entered May 10, 1911, which affirmed an order of an Equity Term striking the above-entitled action from its calendar and directing its trial by a jury in an action to set aside an alleged fraudulent transfer of property from the bankrupt to the defendant. The following question was certified: "Is this action triable by a jury as a matter of right upon the demand of the defendant?" Nelson E. Spencer, for appellant. William N. Cogswell, for respondent. PER CURIAM. Order affirmed, with costs, and question certified answered in the affirma tive. CULLEN, C. J., and GRAY. HAIGHT, WERNER, WILLARD BARTLETT, CHASE, and COLLIN, JJ., concur. PRZECZEWSKI, Respondent, v. BARDSLEY et al., Appellants. (Court of Appeals of New York. Oct. 31, 1911.) Appeal, by permission, from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department (138 App. Div. 907, 123 N. Y. Supp. 1138), entered May 21, 1910, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict in an action to recover for per sonal injuries alleged to have been sustained by plaintiff through the negligence of defendants, his employers. Orlando P. Metcalf and Herbert Noble, for appellants. Julius Hilbern Cohn, for respondent. PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with costs. CULLIN, C. J., and GRAY, WERNER, WILLARD BARTLETT, HISCOCK, CHASE, and COLLIN, JJ., concur. PRZECZEWSKI. Respondent, v. BARDSLEY et al., Appellants. (Court of Appeals of REUSENS v. ARKENBURGH. (Court of Appeals of New York. Oct. 24, 1911.) Crossappeals from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department (138 App. Div. 908, 123 N. Y. Supp. 1138), entered May 24, 1910, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict directed by the court in an action to recover upon an account stated. Edgar J. Nathan, for plaintiff. Herman B. Goodstein and Harry A. Gordon, for defendant. PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, without costs. CULLEN, C. J., and WERNER, WILLARD BARTLETT, HISCOCK, CHASE, and COLLIN, JJ., concur. VANN, J., absent. ROBBINS, Respondent, v. CLOCK, Appel.lant. (Court of Appeals of New York. Nor. 21, 1911.) Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department (131 App. Div. 917, 115 N. Y. Supp. 1142), entered April 10, 1909, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a decision of the court on trial at Special Term in an action to compel specific performance of a contract to conver real property. Alfred W. Varian, for appellant. Le Roy M. Young, for respondent. PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, without costs. CULLEN, C. J., and GRAY, HAIGHT, VANN, WILLARD BARTLETT, HISCOCK, and COLLIN, JJ., concur. In re ROCHE. (Court of Appeals of New York. Dec. 5, 1911.) Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department (141 App. Div. 872, 126 N. Y. Supp. 766), entered December 30, 1910, which affirmed an order of Special Term denying an application for a peremptory writ of mandamus to compel the fire commissioner of the city of New York to place the petitioner on the pension roll of the fire department of that city. Francis A. M Closkey, for appellant. Archibald R. Watson, Corp. Counsel (James D. Bell, of couns-, for respondent. PER CURIAM. Order affirmed, with costs, on opinion of Woodward, J., below. CULLEN, C. J., and HAIGHT, WERNER, WILLARD BARTLETT, HISCOCK, CHASE, |