Εικόνες σελίδας
PDF
Ηλεκτρ. έκδοση

FOSTER et al. v. SUTTON et al. (Supreme Second Department. April 23, 1909.) Action Court, Appellate Division, First Department. by Harris Ginsberg against Joseph M. Schwarz April 16, 1909.) Action by Frederick De P. No opinion. Judgment of the Municipal Court Foster and others against Edward K. Sutton afirmed, with costs. and others. No opinion. Motion denied, with $10 costs. Order filed.

GOLD, Respondent, v. LERNER et al., Ap

pellants. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, FROMENT et al. v. OLDTARSH. (Su- Second Department. April 23, 199.) Action preme CourtAppellate Division, First De by Joseph Gold against Charles Lerner and anpartment. April 16, 1909.). Action by Frank other. No opinion. Judgment of the Municipal L. Froment and others against David M. Old Court afirmed, with costs. tarsh. No opinion. Motion granted, with $10 costs. Order filed. See, also, 60 Misc. Rep. 89, 111 N. Y. Supp. 657.

GOLDING, Respondent, v. GOLDING. AD pellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division,

First Department. April 16, 1909.) Action by GAEBLER, Respondent, v. GALLO et al., Mabel C. Golding against John M. Golding. Appellants. (Supreme Court, Appellate Divi- J. A. Dutton, for appellant. A. T. Davidson, for sion, First Department. April 23, 1909.). Ac- respondent. No opinion. Order modified, by tion' by Helen H. Gaebler against Guiseppe reducing alimony to $500 per month, and, as Gallo and others. J. M. Proskauer, for appel- so modified, afirmed, without costs Order lants. D. R. Almy, for respondent.

filed. PER CURIAM. Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. Order filed. SCOTT, J., dissents.

GOLDSTEIN, Respondent, v. GOLDBERG et al., Appellants. (Supreme Court, Appellate

Division, Second Department. April 23. 119. GARRETT V. DUCLOS. (Supreme Court, Action by David Goldstein against Adolph Gold Appellate Division, First Department. April berg and another. No opinion. Judgment of 16, 1909.) Action by Alonzo B. Garrett against the Municipal Court afirmed, with costs. Bianca E. Duclos. No opinion. Motion denied, with $10 costs. Order filed. See, also, 128 App. Div. 508, 112 N. Y. Supp. 811.

In re GOLDSTICKER. (Supreme Court, Ap pellate Division, First Department. April 16

1909.) In the matter of David Goldsticker, de GASS, Respondent, v. ASTORIA VENEER ceased. No opinion. Motion granted, with $10 MILLS, Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appel

costs. Order filed. late Division, Second Department April 30, 474, 108 N. Y. Supp. 489.

See, also, 123 App. Dir. 1909.) Action by John H. Gass against the Astoria Veneer Mills.

PER CURIAM. Motions granted, on condi GOTTESMAN et al., Appellants, V. BARtion that the respondent pay the costs of the RETT MFG. CO., Respondent. (Supreme appeal in this court, and disbursements, and Court, Appellate Division, First Department also the costs of the appeal to the Court of April '16, 1909.) Action by Mendel Gottesman Appeals before argument, and disbursements, and another against the Barrett Manufacturing and case set down for reargument on June 2; Company. M. Cukor, for appellants. E. B. 1909;, otherwise, motions denied, with $10 Johnson, for respondent. No opinion. Order costs in each motion. See, also, 121 App. Div. affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. 182, 105 N. Y. Supp. 794.

Order filed.

GERSTEN, Appellant, V. ROBINSON, Re GREEN, Respondent, v. LOZIER MOTOR spondent. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Co., Appellant. (Supreme Court. Appellate First Department. April 9, 1909.) Action by Division, First Department. April 23. 10) Sabine Gersten against Edward F. Robinson. Action by Annie G. Green, as administratris, W. C. Rosenberg, for appellant. F. C. Tanner, against the Lozier Motor Company. H. C. for respondent. No opinion. Judgment affirm- Allen, for appellant. F. A. McCloskey, for ed, with costs. Order filed.

respondent.

PER CURIAM. Judgment and order ret GIEBELHAUSEN, Respondent, V. SUM- versed, and new trial ordered, with costs to NER et al., Appellants. (Supreme Court, Ap- appellant to abide event, unless plaintiff stipepellate Division, First Department. April 16, lates to reduce verdict to $5.000, in which 1903.) Action by Frederick R. Giebelhausen event, judgment, as so modified, and order, against A. Ewing Sumner and others. S. Lent, affirmed, without costs. Settle order on notice for appellants. P. L. Ryan, for respondent. No opinion. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. Order filed.

GREEN, Respondent, v. LOZIER MOTOR CO., Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Di

vision, First Department. May 7, 1909.) Ae GIVSBERG, Respondent, v. SCHWARTZ, tion by Annie G. Green, as administratrix,

len, for appellant. F. A. McCloskey, for re- 1 Contracting Company. No opinion. Motion spondent.

denied. Order filed. PER CURIAM. Judgment and order reversed, and new trial ordered, with costs to ap HARTSHORN v. REILLY et al. (Supreme pellant to abide event, unless plaintiff stipu. Court, Appellate Division, Second Department. lates to reduce verdict to $5,000, in which event, May 7, 1909.) Action by La Mott Hartshorn judgment, as so modified, and order, affirmed, against John F. Reilly and others. No opinion. without costs. Settle order on notice.

Motion denied, with costs, and stay vacated.

GREGOIRE, Respondent, V. WALKER &

HEAL, Appellant, v. RICHMOND COUNTY WILLIAMS MFG. CO., Appellant. (Supreme SAVINGS BANK, Respondent. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department. Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, May 5, 1909.) Action by Oscar Gregoire, by April 30, 1909.) Action by Frederick s. Heal Joseph Gregoire, his guardian ad litem, against against the Richmond County Savings Bank. the Walker & Williams Manufacturing Com- No opinion. Motion to amend return_granted, pany. No opinion. Judgment and order un- without costs. See, also, 127 App. Div. 428, animously affirmed, with costs.

111 N. Y. Supp. 602.

GROSS, Respondent, v. AJELLO, Appellant. HECKSHER, Respondent, v. EDENBORN, (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Department. April 23, 1909.) Action by Anna Second Department. April 23, 1909.) Action Gross against Michele Ajello. No opinion. Ap- by August Hecksher against William Eden. peal dismissed, without costs. Slee, also, 116 born. No opinion. Motion denied, with $10 N. Y. Supp. 380.

costs. See, also, 115 N. Y. Supp. 673.

GROSS, Respondent, v. KAHN et al., Appel

HECKSHER, Respondent, v. EDENBORN, lants. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate DiviFirst Department. May 7, 1909.), Action by sion, Second Department. other. I. Gainsburg, for appellants. J. Man Action by August Hecksher against William heim, for respondent. No opinion. Judgment ment of order denied, without costs. See, also,

No opinion. Motion for resettleand order affirmed, with costs. Order filed.

115 N. Y. Supp. 673.

GROSS et al., Respondents, v. LEO, Appel HEDDEN CONST. CO., Respondent, V. lant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First PROCTER & GAMBLE CO., Appellant. (SuDepartment. April 16, 1909.). Action by Al preme Court, Appellate Division, Second De bert B. Gross and others against Michael J. partment. April 23, 1909.) Action by the HedLeo. L. A. Weter, for appellant. H. Meyer, den Construction Company against the Procter for respondents. No opinion. Order affirmed, & Gamble Company. with $10 costs and disbursements. Order filed.

PER CURIAM. Motion granted, on condi

tion that the appellant perfect the appeal forthHAINS, Respondent, v. HAINS, Appellant. with, place the cause at the foot of the present (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second De- calendar, be ready for argument when reached, partment. April 23, 1909.) Action by Peter and pay the respondent $10 costs and the ex? C. Hains, Jr., against Claudia E. Hains.* No pense of advertising; otherwise, denied, withopinion. Order, in so far as appealed from, af-out costs. See, also, 62 Misc. "Rep. 129, 114 firmed, without costs.

N. Y. Supp. 1103.

HELFSTEIN et al., Appellants, V. MEROHALEY, Respondent, v. HUDSON RIVER | VITZ et al., Respondents. (Supreme Court, WOOLEN MILLS, Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department. May Appellate Division, Second Department. April 7, 1909.) Action by Max Helfstein and another 23, 1909.) Action by Bert Haley against the against Harry P. Merovitz and another. No Hudson River Wooien Mills. No opinion. opinion. Order affirmed by default, with $10 Judgment and order unanimously affirmed, costs and disbursements. with costs.

HENRY MILES & SONS, Appellant, v. In re HARDENBROOK. (Supreme Court; HOLLISTER, Respondent. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department., April Appellate Division, Second Department. April 16, 1909.) In the matter of Frank M. Harden- 23, 1909.) Action by Henry Miles & Sons brook. Vo opinion. Motion denied. Settle or against Sebastian Hollister. No opinion. Judgder on notice.

ment of the Municipal Court affirmed, with

costs. HARGRAVE V. NEW YORK CONTRACTING CO. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, HILDRETH, Respondent, DERRENFirst Department. April 30, 1909.) Action BACHER, Appellant." (Supreme Court, Appelby Henry Hargrave against the New York late Division, Third Department. May 5, 1909.)

116 N.Y.S.-72

Action by Herbert L Hildreth against Wil HUGHES, Respondent, v. HARBOR & SUBliams Derrenbacher. No opinion. Order unan- URBAN BUILDING & SAVINGS ASS'S et imously affirmed, with costs.

al., Appellants. (Supreme Court, Appellate Di. vision, Second Department. April 23, 1929

Action by James F. Hughes against the Har TIO-GLEN, Respondent, V. JAMES LIV. bor & Suburban Building & Savings AssociaINGSTON CONST. CO., Appellant. (Supreme tion and another. No opinion. Motion for Court, Appellate Division, Second Department. leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals denied. April 23, 1909.) Action by Frank M. Ho-Glen See, also, 115 N. Y. Supp. 320. against the James Livingston Construction Company. No opinion. Judgment and order of the Municipal Court affirmed, with costs. HUNT v. LONG ISLAND R. CO. (Supreme

Court, Appellate Division, First Department

April 16, 1909.) Action by Addie M. Hunt HOLFSTEIN et al., Appellants, v. MERO- against the Long Island Railroad Company. VITZ et al., Respondents. (Supreme Court, No opinion. Motion denied, with $10 costs. Appellate Division, Second Department. April Order filed. See, also, 115 N. Y. Supp. 478. 23, 1909.) Action by Max Holfstein and another against Harry P. Merovitz and another. PER CURIAM. Motion granted, with $10

IBLED, Appellant, v. KOEHLER, Respood costs, unless the appellants print the appeal, ent. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division. First place the cause upon the calendar, and be ready Department. April 16, 1909.) Action by for. argument on Monday, May 3, 1909, in Pierre Ibled against Arthur J. Koebier. N. which case the motion is denied, without costs. Leon, for appellant. C. Goldzier, for respond

ent. No opinion. Order affirmed, with $10

costs and disbursements. Order filed. HOLLISTER v. BARKER. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First_Department. April 16. 1909.) Action by Frank C. Hollister

INDEPENDENT PEERLESS PATTERN aginst Charles B. Barker. No opinion. Motion CO.,, Appellant, v. TOWNSEND et al., Re denied on terms stated in order. Order filed. spondents. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division

Second Department._April 30, 1903.) Actija

by the Independent Peerless Pattern Company HOOPLE et al., Respondents, v. SCHNEI- against Edward I. Townsend and another. Vi DER et al., Appellants. (Supreme Court, Ap- opinion. Judgment and order affirmed, with pellate Division, Second Department. April 23, costs. 1909.) Action by William G. Hoople and others against Simon Schneider and others. opinion. Judgment of the Municipal Court af JABURG et al., Appellants, v. HASEROT firmed, with costs.

CANNERIES CO., Respondent. (Supreme

Court, Appellate Division, First Department HORDERN v. SALVATION ARMY. (Su- other againsť the Haserot Canneries Compaas.

May 7, 1909.) Action by John Jaburg and sipreme Court, Appellate Division, First Depart. G. Ryall, for appellants. E. Bisbee, for te ment. April 30, 1909.) Action by David Hord

spondent. ern against the Salvation Army. No opinion.

PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with Motion denied, with $10 costs. Order filed.

costs. Order filed. See, also, 124 App. Div. 674, 109 N. Y. Supp. 131.

SCOTT, J., dissents.

No

In re HOTALING. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department. April 16,

JACOBS, Appellant, v. FEINSTEIN et al 1909.) In the matter of John W. Hotaling. Respondents. (Supreme Court, Appellate Di No opinion. Order affirmed, with $10 costs vision, Second Department. April 23, 193 and disbursements. Order filed.

Action by Lewis J. Jacobs against James Fein. stein and others. No opinion. Motion granted,

without costs. HOVER, Respondent, V. MAGLEY, Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department. May 5, 1909.) Action by

JARDINE, MATHESON & CO. V. DEN. Wilson W. Hover against 'Lillian F. Magley. BOSKY et al. (Supreme Court, Appeilate It No opinion. Judgment and order unanimously vision, First Department. April 30, 1:"19.) A alarmed, with costs. See, also, 116 App. Div. tion by Jardinė, Matheson & Co. against El84, 101 N. Y. Supp. 245.

ward Denbosky and another. No opinion. Åp

plication denied, with $10 costs. Order signed HOWELL, Appellant, V. BARNUM, Respondent. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, JEANERETTE, Appellant, V. JUNGMAX, First Department. May 7, 1909.) Action by Respondent. (Supreme Court, Appellate Diri Thomas H. Howell against William T. Bar- sion, First Department. May 7, 1903.) Action num. A. I. Sire, for appellant. C. H. Strong, by Maria Jeanerette against Julius Jungman for respondent. No opinion. Judgment af- T. J. O'Neill, for appellant. J. C. Robinson,

PER CURIAM. Judgment and order af KERWIN v. POST et al. (Supreme Court, firmed, with costs. Order filed.

Appellate Division, First Department. April HOUGHTON, J., dissents.

16, 1909.) Action by Andrew J. Kerwin, Jr., against Alfred Post and another. No opinion.

Motion denied on terms stated in order. Order JOHNSON, Respondent, v. BLANEY, Appel- filed. See, also, 120 App. Div. 179, 104 N. Y. lant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Supp. 1005. Department. May 7, 1909.) Action by John C. R. Johnson against Charles P. Blaney. J. B. Coleman, for appellant. L. H. Levin, for re KIELY, Respondent, v. NEW YORK & H. spondent. No opinion. Judgment and order af- R. CO. et al., Appellants. (Supreme Court, Apfirmed, with costs. Order filed.

pellate Division, First Department. May 7, 1909.) Action by Daniel F. Kiely against the

New York & Harlem Railroad Company and anJONES, Respondent, V. FARMERS' NAT. other. A. S. Lyman, for appellants. D. F. BANK OF HUDSON et al., Appellants. (Su- Kiely, for respondent. No opinion. Judgment preme Court, Appellate Division, Third Depart. and order affirmed, with costs. Order filed ment. May 5, 1909.) Action by Mabel Jones against the Farmers' National Bank of Hudson and others.

KING, Respondent, v. WHITRIDGE, AppelPER CURIAM. Order affirmed, with $10 lant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Seccosts and disbursements.

ond Department. April 23, 1909.) Action by COCHRANE, J., not sitting.

Carl G. King against Frederick W. Whitridge.
No opinion. Judgment and order unanimously

affirmed, with costs. JORDAN, Respondent, v. KEENAN, Appel. lant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First KING, Respondent, V. WILL J. BLOCK Department. April 8, 1909.) Action by Wal- AMUSEMENT CO., Appellant. (Supreme ter C. Jordan against Frank Keenan., J. Fett- Court, Appellate Division, First Department. retch, for appellant. W. D. Leonard, for re- May 7, 1909.) Action by Alice F. H. King spondent. No opinion. Judgment and order af- against the Will J. Block Amusement Compafirmed, with costs. Order filed.

ny. D. Gerber, for appellant. P. N. Turner, for respondent. No opinion. Judgment (115 N.

Y. Supp. 243) affirmed, with costs. Order filed. JOSEPH, Respondent, V. ADRZIG, Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department. April 23, 1909.) Action by Jea KIRWAN, Appellant, v. AMERICAN LITHnette. H. Joseph, as executrix, against Simon OGRAPHIC CO., Respondent. (Supreme Court, Herzig, individually, etc. D. Leventritt, for ap- Appellate Division, First Department. May 7, pellant. J. A. Garver, for respondent.

NO 1909.)

Action by Amelia Kirwan, an infant, opinion. Judgment affirmed, with costs, with against the American Lithographic Company. leave to defendant to withdraw demurrer and to R. B. Meyer, for appellant. F. V. Johnson, for answer on payment of costs. Order filed. See, respondent. also, 115 N. Y. Supp. 330.

PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with costs, on Kirwan v. American Lithographic Co.,

124 App. Div. 180, 108 N. Y. Supp. 805. Order KANE, Appellant, v. NEW YORK CENT. & filed. H. R. R. CO., Respondent. (Supreme Court,

PATTERSON, P. J., and LAUGHLIN, J., Appellate Division, First Department. April 8, dissent, on the dissenting opinion of LAUGH1903.) Action by Josephine M. Kane, as admin- LIN, J., in that case. istratrix, against the New York Central & Hudson River Railroad Company. F. H. Levy, for appellant. R. A. Kutschbook, for respondent. KNAPP, Respondent, v. BECK, Appellant. No opinion. Judgment and order affirmed, with (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Decosts. Order filed.

partment. April 23, 1909.) Action by Lucien Knapp against Abraham Beck. No opinion.

Order of the Municipal Court affirmed, with KAPLAN, Respondent, V. DENIKE et al.,

costs. Appellants. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department. April 23, 1909.) ACtion by Samuel Kaplan against Mary T. Denike KRAUS v. JOHNSON. (Supreme Court, Ap and another. No opinion. Judgment of the pellate Division, First Department. April 16, Municipal Court affirmed, with costs.

1909.) Action by Henry Kraus against Jo

seph Johnson, Jr. No opinion. Motion grantKEARNEY v. NEW YORK CITY RY. CO. ed, with $10 costs. Order filed. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department. April 16, 1909.) Action by Nellie KRONIG, Respondent, v. HARRIS, AppelKearney against the New York City Railway lant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, SecCompany. No opinion. Motion denied, with ond Department. April 23, 1909.) Action by $10 costs. Order filed.

Davis Kronig against Louis I. Harris. No opin

[ocr errors]

er.

ion. Judgment and order of the Municipal LOVAGLIO, Appellant, NEW YORK Court affirmed, with costs.

CENT. & H. Ř. R. CO., Respondent. (Supreme
Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

April 23, 1909.) Action by Antonio Loraglia, In re KURSHEEDT. (Supreme Court, Ap- an infant, etc., against the New York Central pellate Division, First Department. April 23, & Hudson River Railroad Company. No opic1909.) In the matter of Frederick A. Kur-ion. Motion denied. sheedt, deceased. No opinion. Decree affirmed, with costs. Order filed.

LUEZ V. ALEXANDER. (Supreme Court,

Appellate Term. April 8, 1909.) Appeal from LA RUE Appellant, v. WHEELER, Re- District. Summary proceedings to recover the

Municipal Court, Borough of Manhattan, Ninth spondent. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second

Department. April 30, 1909.) Action possession of leased premises by Margaret Luez by Charles La Rue against Frederick J. Wheel Williams. From a final order for the landlord,

against Julia D. Alexander, formerly Julia D.

the tenant appeals. Order modified, and, as PER CURIAM. Judgment of the Municipal | modified, affirmed. Max J. Kohler and Saul S. Court reversed, and new trial ordered, costs to Myers, for appellant. Thomas H. Rothwell, for abide the event, because of error in excluding respondent. the evidence of the plaintiff as to the nature

GILDERSLEEVE, P. J. I think that the and value of his services.

agreement between the parties herein, so far as

it relates to the furniture, is an agreement of LASSER v. LASSER. (Supreme Court, Ap

sale and purchase, and cannot form any part of pellate Division, First Department. April 16, the amount due from the defendant as rent. I 1909.) Action by Rose Lasser against Louis am of the opinion, however, that the agreement. Lasser. No opinion. Motion granted, with $10 tion placed upon it by the acts of the parties

taken in connection with the practical construe costs. Order filed.

establishes the conventional relation of land.

lord and tenant, to the extent of enabling the LATIMER v. McKINNON. (Supreme Court, plaintiff to maintain summary proceedings for Appellate Division, Third Department. May 5, the recovery of the possession of the premises 1909.) Action by Oliver C. Latimer against described in the petition, and that the amount Frank H. McKinnon, as administrator, etc., of of rent due, based upon that fixed by the terms James R. Baumes, deceased.

of the agreement, viz. $809 per month, being PER CURIAM. Order affirmed, with $10 undisputed, there is due from the defendant tbe costs and disbursements.

sum of $533.37 for the month of November, $$19 SEWELL, J., not voting.

for the month of December, and the same amount for the month of January, aggregating the sum of $2,151.37; that being the amount

for which the defendant is liable. The final or LESEM, Respondent, v. GROSSMAN, Appel- der should therefore be modified, by providing lant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, that the amount of rent found due is the sun of First Department. May 7, 1909.), Action by $2,151.37, and, as so modified, affirmed, without William W. Lesem against Adolph Grossman, costs of this appeal. All concur. as administrator. B. Berger, for appellant. F. Hulse, for respondent. No opinion. Judgment

LYMAM, Appellant, v. MERGES et al., Re and order affirmed, with costs. Order filed.

spondents. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division. Second Department. April 23, 1909.) Action

by Benjamin J. Lymam against Francis Mergrs LEWIS, Appellant, v. GEHLEN, Respondent. and another. No opinion. Judgment reversed. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second and new trial granted, costs to abide the event. Department. April 23, 1909.) Action by Jo- on the ground that the case was for the jury. seph Lewis against Charles W. Gehlen. No and the dismissal seems to have been on BO opinion. Motion denied, without costs.

ground whatever.

MAASS, Respondent, v. ROSENTHAL Ap LINDENBORN v. VOGEL. (Supreme Court. pellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Dirision. Appellate Division, First Department. April Second Department. April 23, 1909.) Action 16, 1909.) Action by Solomon Lindenborn by Sophie Maass against Marcus A. Rosenthal. against Lillian B. Vogel. No opinion. Mo No opinion. Order (62 Misc. Rep. 350, 115 N. tion granted to the extent stated in order. Or- Y. Supp. 4) affirmed, with $10 costs and disder filed. See, also, 115 N. Y. Supp. 962. bursements.

LOEWY, Respondent, v. GORDON et al., Ap

MCDONALD, Respondent, v. FLINT. Appelpellants. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division,

lant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division Second Department. April 23, 1909.) Action

Third Department. May 5, 1909.) Actico by by Abraham B. Loewy against Morris Gordon George H. McDonald against Fred Flint. and another. No opinion. Motion granted, with PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with costs. See, also, 129 App. Div. 459, 114 N. Y. costs. Supp. 211.

« ΠροηγούμενηΣυνέχεια »