imposition of costs, stated.-Kramer v. Barth, [ its employés a county charge.-People ex rel.
139 N. Y. S. 341.
Wheeler v. Holmes, 139 N. Y. S. 923.

VII. ON APPEAL OR ERROR, AND ON elections, which had agreed that the commis-

$134 (N.Y.Sup.) Under Election Law, §§ 193,
197, as amended by Laws 1911, c. 649, an
agreement between the board of supervisors and
board of elections that the salaries of the com--Id.
missioners of election, fixed by the board of su-
pervisors, should include all expenses for labor
and clerk hire, held valid, and to prevent the
board of elections from making the salaries of

IV. COURTS OF LIMITED OR INFE- ly involved the admission of all the allegations
RIOR JURISDICTION.

$169 (N.Y.Co.Ct.) Where, in an action in a
County Court for money only, the complaint de-
mands judgment for an amount not over $2,000,
the court has jurisdiction to render judgment
on the counterclaim, irrespective of its amount.
-Weinstein v. Helfenberg, 139 N. Y. S. 303.

§ 170 (N.Y.Co.Ct.) A complaint in the Coun-
ty Court demanding judgment for $800 for
property converted, $200 for ten months' work,
and $2,000 for breach of contract held to state
a cause of action beyond the jurisdiction of the
County Court under Code Civ. Proc. § 340,
subd. 3.-Owen v. Brown, 139 N. Y. S. 451.
Whether the court has jurisdiction of the sub-
ject of the action depends, not on the facts as
they actually exist, but on the facts as stated
by the plaintiff.-Id.

Though a complaint is not ordinarily demur-
rable because the relief demanded is not that
to which plaintiff is entitled, it is otherwise
when the action is brought in an inferior court,
and jurisdiction depends on the relief demand-
ed.-Id.

$188 (N.Y.Sup.) Under Code Civ. Proc. §
3347, subd. 4, permitting equitable defenses in
common-law actions, the City Court of the
city of New York, having jurisdiction of a
common-law action, has jurisdiction to enter-
tain an equitable defense, except that it may
not grant affirmative, equitable relief.-Oppen-
heimer v. Trebla Realty Co., 139 N. Y. S. 894.
$188 (N.Y.Sup.) Under Municipal Court Act,
§ 42, subd. 2, and section 187, providing that
any person may be made a defendant who has
an interest in the controversy, and authorizing
a defendant to apply for an order to bring into
court a third person as a codefendant, the Mu-
nicipal Court has jurisdiction of an action by
a donee of a bank deposit against the bank and
the administrator of the deceased donor.-El-
liott v. Bank for Savings, 139 N. Y. S. 939.

$188 (N.Y.City Ct.) Where an agreement of
partnership or for division of profits renders an
accounting necessary to determine the rights of
the parties, the City Court of the city of New
York has no jurisdiction of the cause of action.
-Cukor v. Rothman, 139 N. Y. S. 1015.

$189 (N.Y.Sup.) Where one made a defend-
ant in the Municipal Court appeared generally
by attorney, the court had jurisdiction to re-
tain him as a party and determine his claim,
as against the objection relating to the manner
of bringing him into court.-Elliott v. Bank for
Savings, 139 N. Y. S. 939.

V. COURTS OF PROBATE JURISDIC-
TION.

$198 (N.Y.Sur.) A jurisdiction is not for the
benefit of the judge, but a matter of public con-
cern, for which reason the surrogate should not
be slow to assert and protect his jurisdiction.-
In re Swartz's Will, 139 N. Y. S. 1105.

of the original petition so far as not denied by
the answer, and all the allegations of the an-
139 N. Y. S. 695.
swer. In re New York Life Ins. & Trust Co.,

VIII. CONCURRENT AND CONFLICT-
ING JURISDICTION, AND
COMITY.

(A) Courts of Same State, and Transfer

of Causes.

§ 472 (N.Y.Sur.) The only remedy in cases of
mistake on the face of a will is in a court of
probate and after such will is admitted to pro-
bate there is no remedy in any other court.-
In re Swartz's Will, 139 N. Y. S. 1105.
(C) Courts of Different States or Countries.
§ 512 (N.Y.Sur.) This state should recognize
the right of a foreign state or nation to impose
a succession tax upon personalty belonging to
its subjects wherever situated; New York im-
posing a similar tax.-In re Hollins, 139 N. Y.
S. 713.

The courts of this state will not ordinarily
aid a foreign country in the enforcement of its
revenue laws.-Id.

COVENANTS.

See Deeds. § 145; Injunction, §§ 61, 113; Land-
lord and Tenant, § 152; Mortgages, § 51.

IV. ACTIONS FOR BREACH.
§ 124 (N.Y.Sup.) On breach of a grantee's
covenant to build a sidewalk fronting lots, held,
that the damages were the difference between
the value of the grantor's remaining land with
the sidewalk and its value without such side-
walk.-Rockwell v. Utz, 139 N. Y. S. 529.
In an action for a grantee's breach of a cov-
enant to build a sidewalk fronting the lots,
where the grantor offered no proof of damage,
the court may only assume that he has suffered
nominal damages.-Id.

CREDITORS.

See Attachment; Bankruptcy; Insurance, §
590; Novation; Principal and Surety, § 147;
Subrogation.

CRIMINAL LAW.

See Arrest: Arson; Assault and Battery;
Chattel Mortgages, § 230; Contempt; High-
ways, 186; Indictment and Information;
Libel and Slander, § 146; Municipal Corpora-
tions. §§ 630, 631; Nuisance, § 91; Perjury;
Receiving Stolen Goods; Sunday; Weapons;
Witnesses.

IV. JURISDICTION.

§ 87 (N.Y.Sup.) Under the Bronx County Act,
§ 9, giving the Courts of Special Sessions as
now constituted the same jurisdiction of of-
fenses triable by such courts as provided, the
Court of Special Sessions has jurisdiction of
the crime of impairing the morals of a minor,
committed after the enactment of the Bronx

§ 202 (N.Y.Sur.) While there is no such thing
as a demurrer in the Surrogate's Court, held, in
an accounting, that determination of a motion
by a respondent to dismiss a defense set up in
the answer of an adverse respondent necessari-
For cases in Dec. Dig. & Am. Dig. Key No. Series & Indexes see same topic and section (§) NUMBER
139 N.Y.S.-74

County Act.-People v. Manett, 139 N. Y. S. [(F) Admissions, Declarations, and Hear-
614.

Under Const. art. 6, § 23, giving Courts of
Special Sessions such jurisdiction of misde-
meanor offenses as may be prescribed by law,
any crime graded by law as a misdemeanor,
including the offense of impairing a minor's
morals, may be prosecuted in that court.-Id.

§ 97 (N.Y.Sup.) Under Pen. Code, § 16, mak-
ing one punishable within the state for any
crime committed in whole or in part therein,
one who wrote and deposited in the post office
in New York City a criminal libel addressed to
another in a foreign country would be guilty
of criminal libel.-People v. Bihler, 139 N. Y.

S. 819.

VII. FORMER JEOPARDY.

§178 (N.Y.Sup.) The inadvertent noting by
the court, on the back of an indictment for
libel, of the granting of a motion to dismiss,
which motion was made with reference to an
indictment for larceny against the same person,
was not a dismissal of the indictment for libel
so as to bar a prosecution thereon.-People v.
Bihler, 139 N. Y. S. 819.

VIII. PRELIMINARY COMPLAINT,
AFFIDAVIT, WARRANT, EX-
AMINATION, COMMITMENT,
AND SUMMARY TRIAL.

§ 217 (N.Y.Mag.Ct.) Any statement under
oath that brings to a magistrate's notice that
a crime has been committed, however crude or
imperfectly drawn, is sufficient to justify the
issuing of a warrant for the arrest of the par-
ty charged with the offense alleged to have
been committed.-People v. Kingston, 139 N. Y.
S. 649.

say.

§ 406 (N.Y.Sup.) Statements by one charged
with arson, voluntarily made to a fire marshal
with knowledge that he was such officer, were
admissible in evidence; Greater New York
Charter, § 779, as to formal examinations by
the fire marshal not referring to a conversation
with one charged with arson and not under
oath.-People v. Schneider, 139 N. Y. S. 104.
(H) Documentary Evidence and Exclusion
of Parol Evidence Thereby.

the preliminary examination of one charged
8438 (N.Y.Sup.) On a trial for perjury at
with committing an offense in a private office,
photographs of the office, not taken at the
time of the offense, held admissible to illustrate
the location of the furniture in the office.-
People v. Veld, 139 N. Y. S. 788.

XII. TRIAL.

(K) Verdict.

§ 874 (N.Y.Sup.) Under Code Cr. Proc. $$ 6,
450, it was not error to discharge a jury with-
out polling it, where the defendant was present
and did not require it, although defendant's at-
torney was not there; no reason being shown
why he was not present.-People v. Schneider,
139 N. Y. S. 104.

XIII. MOTIONS FOR NEW TRIAL
AND IN ARREST.

$968 (N.Y.Co.Ct.) Motion in arrest, under
Code Cr. Proc. $ 467, of a conviction of defend-
ant, under 16 years, of burglary and sentence,
will be granted; the grand jury not having
jurisdiction to find an indictment because of
defendant's age, under Laws 1905, cc. 655, 656,
§ 231 (N.Y.Sup.) A person under arrest held no certificate by a judge having been filed, un-
not entitled to a discharge on habeas corpus der said Code, § 57, that an indictment was
because held for trial without being confront-proper.-People v. Gardner, 139 N. Y. S. 1013.

XV. APPEAL AND ERROR, AND
CERTIORARI.

ed with or having an opportunity to examine
the complaining witness, in violation of Code
Cr. Proc. §§ 194, 195, giving such rights as to
witnesses if in the county, where it appeared (A) Form of Remedy, Jurisdiction, and

that such witness was not within the state.-
People ex rel. Domens v. Warden or Keepers
of City Prison, 139 N. Y. S. 828.

$233 (N.Y.Sup.) A deposition upon which a
warrant was issued for the arrest of defendant
could not be used against him at his trial ex-
amination, where he had no opportunity to
cross-examine such witness at the preliminary
examination.-People ex rel. Domens v. War-
den or Keepers of City Prison, 139 N. Y. S.

828.

Right of Review.

§1023 (N.Y.Sup.) Where sentence is suspend-
ed and no judgment is rendered, there can be
no appeal from the conviction.-People v. Da-
vis, 139 N. Y. S. 643.

1023 (N.Y.Co.Ct.) A sentence by the Court
of Special Sessions does not present an errone-
ous decision or determination of law or fact
upon the trial within Code Cr. Proc. § 750, al-
lowing an appeal, and the County Court cannot
modify the sentence on the ground that it is ex-
cessive, notwithstanding section 764, relating to
rendition of judgment on appeal.-People v.
Dinehart, 139 N. Y. S. 678.

A claim that a sentence imposed by a justice
of Special Sessions is excessive does not pre-
sent the question whether the verdict is against
the evidence.—Id.

$ 1024 (N.Y.Sup.) Under Code Cr. Proc. §
518, the state may appeal from a judgment of
the Court of Special Sessions sustaining a de-
murrer to an information.-People v. Hammer-
stein, 139 N. Y. S. 1075.

(B) Presentation and Reservation in Low-
er Court of Grounds of Review.

§1038 (N.Y.Sup.) Where a court stated that
its reasons for refusing to charge several re-
quests were that they had already been cov-
ered, it was counsel's duty to call the court's at-
tention to any omitted propositions, and re-
quest specific instruction thereon; and, not hav-
ing done so, he cannot complain on appeal of
failure to give an instruction.-People v. Katz,
139 N. Y. S. 137.

(C) Proceedings for Transfer of Cause,
and Effect Thereof.

$1073 (N.Y.Sup.) Where from the language
of bribery statute, in the absence of decisions,
questions of law should be determined on ap-
peal, a certificate of reasonable doubt will be
granted, to review a conviction and determine
whether the indictment charged a crime, and
whether the acts of defendant constituted the
crime of receiving a bribe.-People v. Hyde, 139
N. Y. S. 1000.

(G) Review.

§ 1137 (N.Y.Sup.) The court will not reverse
a conviction for the admission of improper
testimony, acquiesced in by accused's counsel
at the trial.-People v. Veld, 139 N. Y. S. 788.
$1159 (N.Y.Sup.) It is not the duty of the
appellate court to examine the evidence de novo
to determine whether it would have arrived at
the same result as the jury, and it will not
reverse because it might have decided different-
ly.-People v. Katz, 139 N. Y. S. 137.

§ 1169 (N.Y.Sup.) The admission of testi-
mony that an officer looked for accused was
not prejudicial to accused.-People v. Longe-
bodi, 139 N. Y. S. 721.

$11702 (N.Y.Sup.) Where defendant's coun-
sel was allowed to interrupt the examination of
a witness by the district attorney, and ask
questions of the witness to show that state-
ments by defendant to witness were the result
of unlawful pressure, the sustaining of objec-
tions to certain further questions, the court
stating that such questions could be asked on
cross-examination, was not error.-People v.
Schneider, 139 N. Y. S. 104.

terial fact, they could disregard his entire testi-
mony if they saw fit, was not reversible error,
especially where the jury was specially selected
under the statute.-Id.

(H) Determination and Disposition of
Cause.

§1186 (N. Y. Sup.) Where there is nothing to
show that defendant did not have a fair and
impartial trial, a judgment of conviction will be
affirmed, under Code Cr. Proc. § 542.-People v.
Schneider, 139 N. Y. S. 104.

XVII. PUNISHMENT AND PREVEN-
TION OF CRIME.

81206 (N.Y.Sup.) A sentence to the peniten-
tiary of New York county for receiving stolen
property was authorized under New York City
Consolidated Act (Laws 1882, c. 410) § 1453,
providing therefor; such statute being in har-
mony with the Penal Code and not repealed by
Pen. Law, § 1308, prescribing as punishment
for receiving stolen property imprisonment in
the state prison.-People ex rel. Rodenberg v.
Warden, 139 N. Y. S. 212.

The "penitentiary" of the county of New
York is not the county jail of that county in
the sense which the phrase "county jail" is used
in the Penal Laws.-Id.

§ 1212 (N.Y.Sup.) Under Penal Law, § 1941,
providing punishment for second offense of fel-
ony, sections 881, 894, defining forgery and the
offense of possessing counterfeit coin, and U. S.
Rev. St. $ 5457 (U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p.
3683), making it an offense to possess counter-
feit coin with intent to defraud, held that there
was no distinction between the federal offense
and the state offense, so that, after conviction
under the federal statute, defendant might be
convicted of forgery as a second offense.-Peo-
ple v. Carlesi, 139 N. Y. S. 309.

Under Penal Law, § 1941, providing punish-
ment for the second offense of felony, held, that
a conviction under the federal law of an offense
amounting to a felony in this state, after par-
don and restoration to civil rights, might be
the basis of a conviction of a subsequent felony
as a second offense.-Id.

§ 1217 (N.Y.Sup.) The uniform administration
of criminal laws throughout the state does not
require that all sentences to imprisonment
should be carried out in similar institutions.-
People ex rel. Rodenberg v. Warden, 139 N. Y.
S. 212.

811702 (N.Y.Sup.) Where accused gave an-
swers favorable to himself to improper ques-
tions on cross-examination, but the prosecut-
ing officer immediately by further questions
insinuated that the answers were not true, or
were open to suspicion, the error in permitting
the cross-examination was prejudicial.-People See Landlord and Tenant, § 139.
v. Veld, 139 N. Y. S. 788.

$1172 (N.Y.Sup.) Error, if any, in submit-
ting a count under Penal Law, § 881, for ut-
tering a forged instrument, held cured by a con-

CROPS.

CROSS-EXAMINATION.

viction of forgery in the second degree.-Peo- See Witnesses, §§ 277, 349, 387.
ple v. Carlesi, 139 N. Y. S. 309.

81173 (N. Y. Sup.) Where requested charges
were not read in the jury's presence, a refusal

CUSTODY.

to charge any of them could not have been taken See Guardian and Ward, § 29.

by the jury as equivalent to charging the con-

trary.-People v. Katz, 139 N. Y. S. 137.

Failure to instruct that, if the jury believed

CUSTOMS AND USAGES.

that the witness testified falsely as to any ma- See Municipal Corporations, § 818.

For cases in Dec. Dig. & Am. Dig. Key No. Series & Indexes see same topic and section (3) NUMBER

of the use of an automobile while it was being See Evidence, §§ 271, 273.
repaired after a collision held not recoverable,
where no loss to plaintiff's business was shown,
and no other vehicle was hired to take its
place.-Donnelly v. Poliakoff, 139 N. Y. S.