PEOPLE v. JORDAN. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department. October 16, 1914.) Proceeding by the People of the State of New York against Tony Jordan. No opinion. Motion granted. Order filed. PEOPLE v. KNICKERBOCKER DAIRY CO. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department. October 30, 1914.) Proceeding by the People of the State of New York against the Knickerbocker Dairy Company. No opinion. Motion granted, with $10 costs. Order filed. PEOPLE, Respondent, v. LE COMPTE, ApSecond Department. October 30, 1914.) Propellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, ceeding by the People of the State of New York against Edward Le Compte. PER CURIAM. The only credible evidence in this case is to the effect that defendant's wife met him on a public street, and committed an assault upon him, and that he was trying to escape from her at the time he was arrested. This is insufficient to sustain a conviction for disorderly conduct. The judgment of convietion of the city magistrate, and the order of the County Court of Queens County affirming the same, are reversed, and a new trial ordered. Settle order before Mr. Justice Burr. Upon the settlement of the order, the tribunal for the new trial will be considered. PEOPLE v. ORIFICE. (Supreme Court. Appellate Division, First Department. October 16, 1914.) Proceeding by the People of the State of New York against Thomas Orifice. No opinion. Motion granted. Order filed. PEOPLE, Respondent, v. HENDRIX, Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department. October 16, 1914.) Proceeding by the People of the State of New York against Stafford Hendrix. No opinion. Motion granted, without prejudice to any motion that may be made for a dismissal of the appeal upon the ground that this case is not with-heimer. in the purview of the statutes. PEOPLE v. HOROWITZ. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department. October 16, 1914.) Proceeding by the People of the State of New York against Charles S. Horowitz. No opinion. Motion denied. Settle order on notice. See, also, 147 N. Y. Supp. 1131. PEOPLE, Respondent, v. IAGARONE, Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department. November 11, 1914.) Proceeding by the People of the State of New York against Pasquale lagarone, whose true name is Pasquale Iaguadore. No opinion. Judgment of conviction affirmed. (Supreme PEOPLE v. OTTENHEIMER. Court, Appellate Division, First Department. October 30, 1914.) Proceeding by the People of the State of New York against Alfred Ottenfiled. No opinion. Motion granted. Order PEOPLE v. PAYNE et al. In re CARPENTER. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department. October 16, 1914.) Proceeding by the People of the State of New York against Robert D. Payne and another. In the matter of the application of John W. Carpenter for an order canceling and discharging of record a judgment, etc. No opinion. Order of the County Court of Kings County affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. PEOPLE v. SANDLER et al. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department. September 23, 1914.) Proceeding by the People of the State of New York against David E. Sandler and Edgar C. Beach. No opinion. Or- Clarence Cluett, against John J. Twohey, Abider affirmed, without costs. gail R. Cluett, as committee, etc., and others. PER CURIAM. Order affirmed, with costs. Held, that the Special Term correctly decided that further detention, treatment, and observation were necessary before it could be said that the relator had recovered and was no longLAMBERT, J., dissents, and votes for re PEOPLE v. THOMAS. (Supreme Court, as. 10, 1914. versal. PEOPLE ex rel. DORAN v. GALLAGHER et al. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department. October 16, 1914.) Proceeding by the People of the State of New York, on the relation of Frank E. Doran, against Frank Gallagher and others. No opinion. Motion granted, with $10 costs. Order filed. See, also, 82 Misc. Rep. 679, 144 N. Y. Supp. 107. PEOPLE ex rel. EDWARDS v. WALDO. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department. November 13, 1914.) Proceeding by the People of the State of New York, on the relation of Hugh M. Edwards against Rhinelander Waldo, as Commissioner. No opinion. Motion granted, with $10 costs. Order filed. PEOPLE ex rel. EGGERS v. WALDO. (Supreme Court. Appellate Division, First Department. October 16, 1914.) Proceeding by the People of the State of New York, on the relation of Henry A. Eggers, against Rhinelander Waldo, etc. No opinion. Motion granted, without costs. Order filed. PEOPLE ex rel. E. I. DU PONT DE NE PEOPLE ex rel. BOWERY BAY BUILDING & IMPROVEMENT CO., Appellant, v. PURDY et al., Commissioners of Taxes and Assessments. Respondents. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department. November 6, 1914.) Proceeding by the People of MOURS POWDER CO., Respondent, v. GAL(Supreme Court, Apthe State of New York, on the relation of the VIN et al., Appellants. Bowery Bay Building & Improvement Com- pellate Division, Third Department. Septempany, against Lawson Purdy and others, Com-ber 23, 1914.) Proceeding by the People of the missioners of Taxes and Assessments, etc. No State of New York, on the relation of the E. I. opinion. Final order affirmed, with $10 costs Du Pont de Nemours Powder Company, against John F. Galvin and others, constituting the Board of Water Supply of the City of New York, and Frank L. Polk, Corporation Counsel of the City of New York. and disbursements. PEOPLE ex rel. CARLISLE, State Com'r of Highways, Respondent, v. BOARD OF SUP'RS OF ONONDAGA COUNTY, Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department. September 30, 1914.) Proceeding by the People of the State of New York, on the relation of John N. Carlisle, as State Commissioner of Highways, against the Board of Supervisors of Onondaga County. No opinion. Order affirmed, with costs. PEOPLE ex rel. CLUETT, Appellant, v. TWOHEY et al., Respondents. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department. September 30, 1914.) Proceeding by the People of the State of New York, on the relation of PER CURIAM. Order modified, by striking therefrom the findings of fact other than the statement of the presentation of claim and nonaction thereon, and, as modified, affirmed, without costs, unless the city of New York makes a stipulation that an order may be entered by the Supreme Court referring this claim to one of the existing commissions authorized to hear claims of this nature, to be designated by the court. Upon the filing of such stipulation, the order may stand reversed, and the mandamus denied. PEOPLE ex rel. EMPIRE STATE DAIRY CO. v. SOHMER, State Comptroller. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Depart PEOPLE ex rel. HAWTHORNE v. WALDO, Police Com'r, Respondent. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department. No vember 6, 1914.) Proceeding by the People of the State of New York, on the relation of George B. Hawthorne, against Rhinelander Waldo, as Police Commissioner of the City of New York. upon PER CURIAM. The determination of the commissioner, removing the relator grounds stated in writing, and after an opportunity given him to make an explanation, was within the commissioner's powers, and in accordance with section 1543 of the City Charter (Laws 1901, c. 466). The reasons filed in the department, upon their face, are adequate to justify the relator's dismissal. Hence the relator's removal was not reviewable by certiorari. People ex rel. Kennedy v. Brady, 166 N. Y. 44, 59 N. E. 701. The determination of the commissioner is therefore confirmed, and the writ quashed, with $50 costs and disbursements. PEOPLE ex rel. HOME BUREAU, Appellant, v. BELL, Respondent. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department. October 30, 1914.) Proceeding by the People of the State of New York, on the relation of the Home Bureau, against George H. Bell, as Commissioner. L. W. Booth, of New York City, for appellant. T. Farley, of New York City, for respondent. No opinion. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. Order filed. PEOPLE ex rel. HOWLEY, Appellant, v. HENDERSON, Respondent. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department. October 16, 1914.) Proceeding by the People of the State of New York, on the relation of John J. Howley, against James A. Henderson, as Superintendent. M. M. Goldsmith, of New York City, for appellant. W. E. C. Mayer, of New York City, for respondent. No opinion. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. Order filed. PEOPLE ex rel. JIMESON et al., Appellants, v. SHONGO et al., Respondents. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department. October 7, 1914.) Proceeding by the People of the State of New York, on the relation of Glennie M. Jimeson and others, against Moses Shongo and others. No opinion. Motion granted to amend, nunc pro tunc, the order of affirmance entered July 7, 1914 (148 N. Y. Supp. 1137), so as to state that the decision was made upon questions of law only, and not in the exercise of any discretion. Motion for leave to appeal to Court of Appeals denied. upon the ground that leave to appeal is not necessary. PEOPLE ex rel. JEMISON et al., Appellants, v. SCOTT et al., Respondents. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department. October 7, 1914.) Proceeding by the People of the State of New York, on the relation of George A. Jemison and others, against King Scott and others. PER CURIAM. Motion granted to amend, nunc pro tunc, the order of affirmance entered July 7, 1914 (148 N. Y. Supp. 1137), so as to state that the decision was made upon questions of law only, and not in the exercise of any disMotion for leave to appeal to Court of Appeals denied, upon the ground that leave to appeal is not necessary. cretion. PEOPLE ex rel. JENNY, Respondent, v. ROME & O. R. CO., Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department. October 7, 1914.) Proceeding by the People of the State of New York, on the relation of Rudolph Jenny, against the Rome & Osceola Railroad Company. No opinion. Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. PEOPLE ex rel. KENNEDY, Respondent, v. CALKINS. Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division. Third Department. November 11, 1914.) Proceeding by the People of the State of New York, upon the relation of T. Francis Kennedy, against James S. Calkins. No opinion. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. PEOPLE ex rel. LEAKE & WATTS OR- the relation of Henry W. Phillips, against John PHAN HOUSE v. NEVILLE et al. (Supreme J. Hanley, Warden, etc. No opinion. Motion deCourt, Appellate Division, Second Department. nied. Order filed. See, also, 149 N. Y. Supp. October 2, 1914.) Proceeding by the People of 452. the State of New York, on the relation of the Leake & Watts Orphan House, against Robert H. Neville and others. No opinion. Motion denied, on condition that the appellant perfect the appeal, place the case on the November calendar, and be ready for argument when reached; otherwise, motion granted. PEOPLE ex rel. RYAN v. McKAY. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department. November 13, 1914.) Proceeding by the People of the State of New York, on the relation of John T. Ryan, against Douglas I. McKay, as Commissioner. No opinion. Motion granted, with $10 costs. Order filed. PEOPLE ex rel. LYONS, Appellant, v. HOPPER, Respondent. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department. October PEOPLE ex rel. SOMMER v. LAUER. 16, 1914.) Proceeding by the People of the (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First DeState of New York, on the relation of John J.partment. October 16, 1914.) Proceeding by Lyons, against John J. Hopper, as Register, the People of the State of New York, on the etc. A. J. Talley, of New York City, for appel- relation of Nathan Sommer, against Edgar J. lant. E. C. Kindleberger, of New York City, Lauer, as Justice, etc. No opinion. Motion for respondent. No opinion. Order affirmed, granted, with $10 costs. Order filed. with $10 costs and disbursements. Order filed. PEOPLE ex rel. MOORE, Respondent, v. DOOLEY, Appellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department. October 30, 1914.) Proceeding by the People of the State of New York, on the relation of Benjamin E. Moore, against John Dooley, as President, etc. B. J. Wright, of New York City, for appellant. T. A. McCole, of New York City, for respondent. No opinion. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. Order filed. PEOPLE ex rel. NATIONAL NASSAU BANK. Appellant, v. PRENDERGAST, Comptroller, Respondent. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department. October 16, 1914.) Proceeding by the People of the State of New York, on the relation of the National Nassau Bank, against William A. Prendergast, as Comptroller, etc. S. Bacon, of New York City, for appellant. C. J. Nehrbas, of New York City, for respondent. No opinion. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. der filed. Or PEOPLE ex rel. WILKINSON v. FROTHINGHAM. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department. October 30, 1914.) Proceeding by the People of the State of New York, on the relation of James Wilkinson, against Edgar V. Frothingham. No opinion. Motion granted, with $10 costs. Order filed. PEOPLE ex rel. YOUNG et al., Respondents, V. GULVIN Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department. et al., Appellants. (Supreme October 7, 1914.) Proceeding by the People of the State of New York, on the relation of G. B. Young and others, against Reuben H. Gulvin and others. PER CURIAM. Judgment (149 N. Y. Supp. 117) affirmed, with costs, upon the opinion of SUTHERLAND, J., delivered at the Trial Term. ROBSON, J., not sitting. PEOPLE'S NAT. BANK OF BROOKLYN See, also, 153 App. Div. 937, 138 N. Y. Supp. IN NEW YORK, Respondent, v. SCHISSEL, 1137. W. J. Wetherbee, of Buffalo, for appelAppellant. (Supreme Court, Appellate Divi- lant. D. J. Kenefick, of Buffalo, for respondsion, Second Department. November 6. 1914.) ent. Action by the People's National Bank of Brooklyn in New York against Paul Schissel. No opinion. Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. PERHAM, Respondent, v. COTTLE et al., Appellants. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department. October 21, 1914.) Action by B. Frank Perham, individually and as administrator, etc., against Jennie Williams Cottle, individually and as executrix, etc., and others. No opinion. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. verdict was held to be "contrary to and against PER CURIAM. Upon the former appeal the the weight of the evidence." We now hold, upon the present record, not only that the weight of the evidence is against the plaintiff upon the question of defendant's negligence, but also that as matter of law the evidence is insufficient to establish actionable negligence against the defendant. The record discloses no reversible error, and therefore the plaintiff's exceptions should be overruled, the motion for a new trial denied, and judgment having been entered, and an appeal also taken therefrom, the judgment should be affirmed, with costs. PERHAM V. COTTLE et al. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department. PIERCE v. SUN INS. OFFICE. (Supreme October 21, 1914.) Action by Henrietta F. Per- Court, Appellate Division, First Department. ham against Jennie Williams Cottle, individual- November 13, 1914.) Action by Fred E. Pierce ly and as executrix, etc., and others, impleaded against the Sun Insurance Office. No opinion. with Edmund P. Cottle. No opinion. Inter-Application granted. Order signed. See, also, locutory judgment aflirmed, with costs, with 86 Misc. Rep. 1, 147 N. Y. Supp. 947. leave to the appellant to plead over within 20 days, upon payment of the costs of the demurrer and of this appeal. PLINUS v. FIELDSTEEL. (Supreme Court. Appellate Term, First Department. November. 19, 1914.) Appeal from Municipal Court. Borough of Manhattan, Third District. Action by Adele Plinus against Charles S. Fieldsteel. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. Reversed, and new trial granted. Otto A. Glasberg, of New York City, for appellant. Nathaniel Choloney, of New York City, for respondent. BIJUR, J. This action was brought to recover on a check made and delivered by defendant to plaintiff's assignors. The record is meager and exceedingly unsatisfactory. Respondent does not attempt to explain the fact that the judgment was rendered for $100.23 damages, although the check is for $101.54. Moreover. it seems quite evident on the record that the defendant was entitled to be allowed at least one of the counterclaims interposed by him, for $10.15 costs, awarded in a previous action brought by the same plaintiff against him, evidence of which was admitted at the trial. Under the circumstances, it is evident that the issues presented by the pleadings should receive a deliberate trial, and a judgment be rendered in accordance with the resulting evidence. Judgment reversed, and a new trial granted. with costs to appellant to abide the event. All concur. PLUEMER, Appellant, v. BERWIND, Respondent. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division. First Department. October 23, 1914.) Action by Adolph Pluemer against Edward J. Berwind. J. P. Everett, of New York City, for appellant. J. W. Welsh, of New York City, for respondent. No opinion. Judgment affirmed, with costs. Order filed. |