Reports of Cases Decided in the Court of Appeals of the State of ..., Volum 111
Av New York (State). Court of Appeals, George Franklin Comstock, Henry Rogers Selden, Francis Kernan, Hiram Edward Sickels
of New York reversing a judgment for plaintiff entered on the verdict and dismissed the complaint.
Strong & Cadwalader for motion.
Raphael J. Moses opposed.
Ågree to dismiss appeal; no opinion.
All concur.
Appeal dismissed.
Augustus Ross, as Executor, etc., et al., Respondents, v.
DE Wirt A. GLEASON, et al., Appellants.
The General Term has power to amend an order of reversal so as to show
that the reversal was upon the facts, although an appeal has been perfected and a return made to this court, and the order as amended may be attached to the return.
(Argued November 27, 1888; decided December 4, 1888.)
MOTION to amend an order of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the third judicial department, made at the April Term, 1887, which reversed a decree of the surrogate of Chenango county denying probate to a codicil to the last will and testament of Alexander Foster, deceased, plaintiff's testator. The motion was referred back and the return herein to the General Term, and that a motion may then be made to amend the order of reversal by inserting after the words " is hereby reversed" the words "on questions of fact and law."
Solomon Bundy for motion.
Albert F. Gladding opposed.
The following is the mem. of decision :
"Motion denied, without costs, upon the ground that the General Term have power to entertain a motion to amend their order, which, if done, may be attached to the return in this court."
Motion denied.
Philip DEOBOLD, as Executor, etc., Respondent, v. FREDERICK
OPPERMANN, Jr., et al., Appellants. This case presented the same questions and was argued and decided with Deobold v. Oppermann. (Ante, p. 531.)
THE PEOPLE ex rel. ANDREW MCCLINTOCK, Appellant, v.
STEPHEN B. FRENCH et al., Com'rs, etc., Respondents.
(Argued November 27, 1888; decided December 11, 1888.)
APPEAL from order of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, made January 23, 1888, and an order amending the same made March 10, 1888, which affirmed the proceedings of the Police Board of the city of New York dismissing the relator from the force.
Louis J. Grant for appellant.
D. J. Dean for respondents.
Agree to affirm; no opinion.
Orders affirmed:
John S. Barry, Respondent, v. J. FRANK CALDER et al.,
Impleaded, etc., Appellants.
(Argued November 27, 1888, decided December 11, 1888.)
APPEAL from order of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the third judicial department, made May 18, 1888, which affirmed an order of Special Term denying a motion to set aside an order of arrest.
G. B. Wellington for appellants.
C. S. McChesney for respondent.
Agree to affirm order; no opinion.
HENRY C. HENDERSON, Respondent, v. THE COMMERCIAL
ADVERTISER ASSOCIATION, Appellant.
APPEAL from an interlocutory judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, entered upon an order made December 13, 1887, which reversed a judgment entered upon an order sustaining a demurrer to the complaint herein and gave defendant leave to withdraw the demurrer and answer.
Charles 0. Brewster for appellant.
William C. Reddy for respondent.
Agree to affirm judgment; no opinion.
Judgment affirmed.
ELIZABETH Phillips, Administratrix, etc., Respondent, v.
THE TROY AND Boston RAILROAD COMPANY, Appellant.
(Argued December 3, 1888; decided December 11, 1888.)
APPEAL from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the third judicial department, entered upon an order made November 30, 1886, which affirmed a judgment entered upon a verdict in favor of plaintiff.
Edgar L. Fursman for appellant.
E. Countryman for respondent.
John SPICKERMAN, Respondent, v. ADAM MCHESNEY, as
Executor, etc., Appellant.
APPEAL from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the third judicial department, entered upon an order made the third Tuesday of November, 1886, which affirmed a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon the report of a referee.
The prominent points presented in this case were disposed of on the ground that they related to questions of fact, as to which there was evidence sufficient to justify the findings, and 80 that the decision of the court below was conclusive. Other objections were disposed of on the ground that they were not raised on the trial.
G. B. Wellington for respondent.
DANFORTH, J., reads for affirmance.
Mary FITZGERALD, Administratrix, etc., Respondent, v. The
City OF BINGHAMTON, Appellant.
Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the fourth judicial department, entered upon an order made April 20, 1886, which affirmed a judgment entered upon a verdict in favor of plaintiff.
A. D. Wales for appellant.
Edmund O'Connor for respondent.
In the Matter of the Personal Estate of ELIZABETH R. WEST,
Deceased.
Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the fourth judicial department, entered upon an order made April 20, 1886, which affirmed a decree of the surrogate of Oneida county revoking, as to Mary R. Jones, letters of administration issued to her and one Joseph E. West upon
the goods, chattels and credits of Elizabeth R. West, deceased.
D. C. Stoddard for appellant.
William Kernan for respondent.
In the Matter of the Accounting of Mary R. Jones, as
Administratrix, etc.
APPEAL from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the fourth judicial department, entered upon an order made May 1, 1886, which affirmed so much of a decree of the . surrogate of Oneida county settling the accounts of Mary R. Jones, as administratrix of the estate of Elizabeth R. West, deceased, as allowed her costs, expenses and counsel fees in proceedings to remove her as administratrix.
William Kernan for appellant.
D. C. Stoddard for respondent.
Agree to dismiss appeal, with costs, on the ground that the allowance was discretionary;" no opinion.