Слике страница
PDF
ePub

Mandamus will issue to require the assessors
to make and file a statement of the amount of
damages sustained in changing the grade of a
street, and this direction, by the statute of 1872,
was absolute and not dependent on any other
certificate whatever. People v. Asten. 398

MARRIED WOMEN.

MASTER AND SERVANT.

Where a son lived with his father and assisted
him in his business. Held, that he acted as ser-
vant or clerk of his father and had he not been
a son would clearly have been considered a
clerk or servant and have been entitled to pay-
ment for his services. Queen v. Foulkes

58

Duty of master to employee to construct safe,
Power of married women to convey separate and to keep safe, machinery. Notice to party
estate. May do so when the power is not with- of contract with third party to keep machinery
held in deed or devise; and without the consent in safe condition. Duty of party to notice con-
of the husband, if there is a private examina-dition of machinery as to safety for use. King
tion legally taken under Tennessee statute.
v. New York &c. R. R. Co.
Can convey with the husband's consent, if so
examined, and the husband may join in the
deed. Hodges v. Williams.
162

[blocks in formation]

Married women may sue for their own
money lent during their husband's lifetime.
Or a due-bill to them after husband's death
is evidence of debt to them. Wilby v. Elgee.
186
Married woman, liability of, and remedy
against. Jourdan v. Bernheim.
282

A wife may constitute her husband her agent
and be bound by his acts, but the agency will
not be assumed without any evidence. There
must be some evidence that in his dealings the
husband acted as agent and not as principal;
that his contracts were for the wife, upon her
credit, with her assent, with knowledge that
her credit was pledged, and that she was under-
stood to be the contracting party. Jones V.
Alker.

322

Though, at common law, the personal pro-
perty of the wife belongs to the husband, his
long acquiescence in the investment of her
money and earnings in real property, in her
own name, puts the property beyond his reach
and control. Jackson v. Jackson.

472

92

The chairman of a public meeting is not liable
for an assault by one who seeks to repress a dis-
turbance by his direction. Lucas v. Mason 187

[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]

Where the title to a bankrupt's property
passed to an assignee in bankruptcy before a me-
In such a case the presumption is not that chanic's lien attached, as authorized by a stat-
there is a resulting trust in him, but that there ute of Michigan, Held, that proof of the claim as
was an advancement for the grantee's benefit. a secured claim could not be filed. Re Sabin
Ib.
101

[blocks in formation]

As to a mechanic's lien for work on wife's
property by employment of husband, when there
is no proof of agency and the wife seeing im
provement being made and not objecting.
-See Jones v. Alker.

322

Though it is undisputed in the case that the
wife has a separate estate, that would not give
her note validity; proof of further extrinsic tor, though he is the same person. Ryan v. Gir-

facts to bind her must be shown.

The lien must name both owner and contrac-

Ib.

oux.

A married woman who hires a house for the
purposes of her business, and uses a portion of
it for the family residence, her husband living
with her, is liable for the whole rent, the con-
tract being one contract. Monheimer v. Muller
562

399

Lien cannot be amended in such a matter.
Ib.

A personal judgment may be recovered in an
action to foreclose a lien.
Ib.

[blocks in formation]

Where a request for a lease of premises for
military purposes was not in favor of any par-
ticular troop or regiment, but for the cavalry,
generally, in an action to recover arrears of
rent. Held, that the request was not in com-
pliance with § 120 of the military code, and
the lease was therefore without authority. That
the New York act of 1873, in reference to ar-
rears in rent did not protect the claim since it
accrued after the passage of the act. Dickel v.
Mayor, &c., of New York.

MISTAKE.

396

[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]

A third person who supplies the money to
pay the coupons of bonds, secured by a mort-
gage, will have the security of the mortgage,
though the coupons have been detached. Union
400
Trust Co. v. Monticello, &c., R. R. Co.

But the equities of the bondholders, who sup-
posed their coupons were paid on delivery, are
superior to those of such person.

In a foreclosure suit, a motion to open a de-
fault by the owners of the equity of redemp-
tion, indorsed by T as their attorney is suf-
ficient appearance.
Martine v. Lowenstein.

405

Parties interested in a judgment in foreclos-
ure can appear, even after judgment, to take
care of their interests in the subsequent pro-
ceedings, which the plaintiff must necessarily
take.
Ib.

By Rule 39, notice of the filing of the report
must be given to all who are entitled to notice.
The report is confirmed eight days after the
Ib.
notice of filing is served.

An omission to demand judgment for a de-
ficiency, does not convert an action into a
strict foreclosure, but is an action for the satis
faction of a mortgage within the meaning of
the statute. Equitable Life In's. Co. v. Stevens.

465

[blocks in formation]

MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS.

There is no authority in the common coun-
cil of New York city to appoint executive offi-
cers; the power of appointment, when it exists,
and to whom it may be delegated. Hartman v.
the Mayor, &c., of New York.

10

[blocks in formation]

To avoid the payment of present assessment,
payment of former assessment for public im-
Authority of comptroller in New York city,provement, must be shown; it cannot be pre-
to fix salaries and compensation, and to pre-sumed from lapse of time. Publication in cor-
scribe duties of clerks and employees, deter-poration papers-what is not sufficient. Petition
mined. See Burns v. the Mayor &c. of the City of Eiscle.
of New York.

10

The authority of coroners to employ scien
tific experts in cases of felonious poisoning,
and the compensation for their labor, deter-
mined. Doremus v. the Mayor, &c., of New York.
310

No liability of the corporation for debts con-
tracted by a department thereof without au-
thority. Receipt of principal debt in full,
effect of, on claim for interest. Laws of 1872,
Ch. 9, 2, construed. Tenth National Bank v.
Mayor, &c., of New York.
46

65

257

[blocks in formation]

What property is private property of the cor-
Where a certain percentage of moneys re-
poration. Ferries may be removed. Real es-ceived by a municipal board is given for a defi
tate about a ferry as part of the ferry itself. nite purpose, the officers of the board receive
People v. City of Albany, &c.
the moneys as public agents, in a ministerial
capacity, for the recipient of the percentage,
and have no discretion as to its disposition.
People v. Board of Police

A municipal corporation not liable, at com-
mon law, for injuries resulting from the defec-
tive condition of a public highway or bridge.
Neither is a public officer, whose duty it is to
keep the road or bridge in order, liable person-
ally. Wheatly v. Mercer.
123

The determination of the common council of
the City of Brooklyn is final and conclusive as
to facts to be ascertained for the purpose of
carrying on improvements. Wicks. v Hatch.

147

[blocks in formation]

406

[blocks in formation]

A provision in a temporary act-such as the
annual tax levy of the city of New York, will The necessity of an appraisal of New York
not operate to repeal or modify charter regula-city property, is to be determined by the board
tions, or general laws, without an express in- of commissioners of the sinking fund. Muller
tention to that effect. Costello v. Mayor, &c., of v. Mayor, &c., of New York.
522
New York.

236

When there is a fund in a department of the
When the comptroller must fix the compen-city of New York, at the time a debt was in-
sation for a public service, it is a condition pre-curred, it will be presumed that payments of
cedent to a recovery that he shall fix it. A sums made therefrom for other purposes, were
recovery cannot be had on a quantum meruit. for debts which had acerued after the fund was
Muller v. Mayor, &c., of New York.
exhausted. Lewis v. Mayor, &c., of New York.

237

The only authorized appraisals of the prop-
erty of New York city are to fix rents on the
renewal of leases, and to value city property to
be sold.
Ib.

488

As to Assessments for local improvements,
see ASSESSMENTS.

[blocks in formation]

who is corroborated in some particulars. The
jury determines the question of veracity, in
such a case. People v. Court of Special
Sessions.

242

In an action brought to recover damages for
A new trial will not be granted, though a
alleged negligence on the part of the defend- verdict is found on the testimony of one wit-
ant's testator, resulting in the loss of twenty-ness against the testimony of another witness
two cows, where it appeared that the cows were
delivered to the testator, at his cattle yards, to
be kept until they could be shipped East, and
the yard in which they were put was one in or-
dinary use, but lower than the others, and in
case of a flood liable to be overflowed, and
during the night an unprecedented and un-
expected storm arose, the yard was overflowed,
and they were drowned. Held, that the evidence
of negligence on the part of the defendant's
testator was not sufficient to justify the sub-
mission of the question to the jury, and the

fact that defendant's testator put his own cat-

tle in a yard where they escaped injury, did
not tend to show negligence. Morgan v.

Crocker.

115

[blocks in formation]

Costs must be paid as a condition for grant-
ing a new trial for newly discovered evidence.
Bailey v. Park.

353

Where a witness, from his connection with

the transaction out of which the suit arose,
would in all probability be a material witness,
the failure to have him in court is laches of so
positive a character that his testimony will not
be such newly discovered evidence as to give
a party a new trial. Hernstein v. Fleming.
401

[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]

An agreement by a person to pay the share
of the partner whose interest is purchased by
him, made at the time of the purchase, is part
of the consideration of the purchase, and is
not a promise to pay the debt of another.
Haggerty v. Johnston.
129
Agreement to pay a certain portion of the pro-
fits of a venture, for services therein not void
under the statute of frauds. Kelsey v. Henry.
129
The special partner must contribute cash.
Any other contribution makes him a general
partner, for the statute is not complied with,
and the representation is not true. Van Ingen
V. Whiteman.
Re Merrill.

138

364

[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]

The war proclamations of April 15, 1861,
April 19, 1861, and August 16, 1861, and act of As to the option of date with a borrower to
July 13, 1861, and their effect upon copartner-pay, when two dates are named. See Reed v.
ships. Discussed and determined. Matthews Kilburn Society.
v. McStea.

285

Where a complaint alleged that the plaintiff
and defendant entered into a copartnership to
continue five years; that by the partnership
agreement the business was to be done in the
defendant's name, that plaintiffs were to, and
did advance $16,500 for the purposes of the
business, and were to receive interest thereon,
and one quarter of the net profits, and that de-
fendant refused to give plaintiff any account of
the receipts and profits, and asked for the dis-
solution of the copartnership, and an account-
ing. Held, that the issue made by the plead-
ings was whether a partnership existed between
plaintiff and defendant, and whether the latter
had violated the terms thereof, and when that
issue was decided against the plaintiff, the ac-
tion was at an end, and the defendant was en-
titled to judgment. Arnold v. Angell 286

Owners of a boat, though tenants in common
as to their property in the boat itself, are part-
ners as to its earnings. Callahan v. Brewer.

445

19

[blocks in formation]

The purchaser of personal property known
to him to be mortgaged, is bound by the equi-
It is inequitable to allow a partner who has ties between the parties to the mortgage. Coble
an interest in the earnings of the partnership | v. Nonemaker.

321

« ПретходнаНастави »