Case law

Clarissey v. Metropolitan Fire Department

1 Sweeny 224 · The Superior Court of New York City · Jun 11, 1869

I know it has been said in some of the casés (Lyon v. Adams, 4 Serg. and Rawle, 443; Gardner v. Board of Health of New York, 10 N. Y. … In Gardner v. The Board of Health, ubi supra, the defendant was held not to be a corporation.

East River Bank v. Rogers

7 Bosw. 493 · The Superior Court of New York City · Dec 29, 1860

(Mann v. Eckford, 15 Wend. 508 .) The answer does not deny that Chase failed to pay within the sixty days. (Douglass v. Howland, 24 Wend. 48 ; Whitney v. Groot, Id. 82 ; Smith v. Dann, 6 Hill, 543 ; Curtis v. … Brown, 2 Barb. 51 .)

Smith v. Hall

5 Bosw. 319 · The Superior Court of New York City · Nov 5, 1859

(Lloyd v. Sigourney. 3 Youngs & Jervis, 220; Nelson et al. v. … Is the absence of a previous resolution of the Board of Trustees authorizing the transfer, a bar to this action? ■ Howland v.

Manhattan Iron Works Co. v. French

12 Abb. N. Cas. 446 · The Superior Court of New York City · Dec 15, 1882

Canal Board ( 55 N. … Div. 102; Attorney-General v. Hackney Local Board, L. R. 20 Eq. Cas. 626; Mayor, &c. v. Rural, &c., L. R. 1 Exch. Div. 344).

Tyng v. Theological Seminary of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the Diocese of Ohio

14 Jones & S. 250 · The Superior Court of New York City · Jun 18, 1880

In Railroad Co. v. … V.

Brookman v. Metcalf

5 Bosw. 429 · The Superior Court of New York City · Dec 10, 1859

In Howland v. … (Holbrook v. Wilson, November Term, 1858; 1 Holbrook v. Basset, July, 1859. 2 ) The defendant had agreed to gives notes in advance.

Howard v. Astor Mutual Insurance

5 Bosw. 38 · The Superior Court of New York City · May 28, 1859

(Brown v. Harris, 2 Gray, 359 ; Vanderbilt Cases, 19 Barb., 222 ; 21 id., 26; Lewis v. Marshall, 7 Man. and Grang., 729; Cope v. Dodd, 13 Penn. R., 33.) … (Jordan v. Warren Ins. Co., 1 Story C. C. R., 351; Mayo v. Maine Fire Ins. Co., 4 Mass., 374 ; Everth v. Smith, 2 Maul. &. Sel., 278; 2 Arn. on Ins., §§373, 396; McSwinny v. Royal Ex. Ass. Co., 13 Jurist, 489; Ogden v.

Classen v. Leopold

2 Sweeny 705 · The Superior Court of New York City · Dec 31, 1870

This is the point ruled in Purvis v. Coleman, supra. … The defendants, therefore, cannot set off the board bill. They have not pleaded it as a counter-claim. But they can recoup it. They occupy the position of bailees of the goods; and the principle of Hoy v.

Hughes v. Alexander

5 Duer 488 · The Superior Court of New York City · Apr 15, 1856

A rule which bears upon this question is found in the cases of Birlchead v. Brown, in this court, (5 Sandf. S. Ct. Rep. 145; Davis v. Talcott, 14 Barbour S. Ct. Rep. 619; Campbell v. Butts, 3 Comstock, 173; and Doty v. … Brown, 4 Comstock, 71.) In the former Mr.

Dabney v. Stevens

2 Sweeny 415 · The Superior Court of New York City · Apr 30, 1870

A general agent might be deemed vested with power to make such contracts, when necessary, in the intervals of corporate meetings, if the corporation had no other board of control but the agent; but if they have such a board … But in all these cases the board of directors or trustees had full ■knowledge of the facts, and I have been unable to find a single case in which a subsequent ratification has been inferred without proof that the board of

Haack v. Fearing

4 Abb. Pr. 297 · The Superior Court of New York City · Oct 15, 1867

In the case of Lambt v. … In the cases of Joel v. Morrison (6 Carr. & P., 501), and Sleath v.

Tolano v. National Steam Navigation Co.

4 Abb. Pr. 316 · The Superior Court of New York City · Jan 15, 1868

Only in such cases would an action in the form of trover have for-, merly lain, even against common carriers (Deveroaux v. Barclay, 2 Barn. & Ald., 703; Stephens v. Hart, 4 Bing., 476; Youl v. … Harbottle, Peake Cas., 49; Sublock v. Inglis, 1 Stark, 154).

Lorillard v. Clyde

24 Jones & S. 14 · The Superior Court of New York City · May 7, 1888

Brown, 68 Ib. 359; Garnsey v. Rogers, 47 Ib. 240; Vrooman v. Turner, 69 Ib. 283. The disinclination of the courts to extend the doctrine of Lawrence v. Fox appears in almost every case in which it is cited. Wheat v. … Y. 302 ; Pardee v. Treat, 82 Ib. 385 ; Ætna National Bank v. The Fourth National Bank, 46. 82; Turk v. Redge, 41 Ib. 201; Hutchins v. Miner, 46 Ib. 456; Merril v. Green, 55 Ib. 270; Simson v. Brown, 68 Ib. 356.

Stuyvesant v. Grissler

12 Abb. Pr. 6 · The Superior Court of New York City · Jul 1, 1868

In Clowes v. … And in a recent case in this court (Corwin v.

Richmond v. Second Avenue Railroad

60 N.Y. St. Rep. 629 · The Superior Court of New York City · Jun 15, 1894

Price v. Brown, 98 N. Y. 388 ; Buck v. Barker, 5 St. Rep. 826 ; Avery v. N. Y. C. & H. R. R. R. Co., 106 N. Y. 142 ; 8 St. Rep. 612 ; Price v. Brown, 112 N. Y. 677 ; 21 St. Rep. 573 ; Collyer v. … People v. N. Y. Central R. R. Co., 29 N. Y. 418 ; Brown v. Brown, 58 N. Y. 609 The first point for our consideration is, whether in fact the case was disposed of in the court below on the question of power.

People ex rel. Ferro v. Andrews

22 Jones & S. 183 · The Superior Court of New York City · Nov 24, 1886

Hanlon v. … Y. 361 ; People v. Board of Police Commissioners, 93 Ib. 101). It is clear that the respondents were a subordinate tribunal within the meaning of this rule.

Higgins v. Soloman

2 Hall 482 · The Superior Court of New York City · Dec 15, 1829

It was clearly proved that he was sent on board the vessel, as the agent and supercargo of the defendant, and continued on *488 board as such, throughout the voyage. … The same doctrine is also fully recognized in Gardner v. Gardner, [10 J. R. 47,] and in Thomas v. Wood, [4 Cowen's R. 185.] 2.

Millikin v. Dehon

10 Bosw. 325 · The Superior Court of New York City · Mar 14, 1863

(Hart v. Ten Eyck, 2 Johns. Ch., 62 ; Opinion of Kent, J., Cortelyou v. Lansing, 2 Cai. Ca., 200; Garlick v. James, 12 Johns., 146 ; Stearns v. Marsh, 4 Den., 227 , per Jewett, J.; Wheeler v. Newbould, 16 N. Y. … The difficulty of giving notice of a sale at that board would be nearly as great as at a private sale.

Warner v. Western Transportation Co.

5 Rob. 490 · The Superior Court of New York City · Mar 15, 1868

In other cases, (Edwards v. Sherratt, 1 East, 604; Titchburne v. White, 1 Str. R. 145; Relf v. … [Bradley v. Waterhouse, 1 Mood. & M. 154. Story on Bailm. 77. Relf v. Ralph, 3 Watts & S. 21 . Orange County Bank v. Brown *496 9 Wend. 116 .) In the case last cited, (Orange County Bank v.

King v. Phillips

8 Bosw. 603 · The Superior Court of New York City · Nov 30, 1861

In Tanner v. Bennett, (1 Ry. & Moody, 182 ;) Root v. French, ( 13 Wend., 570 ;) and Brown v. Montgomery, (20 N. Y. R., 287,) it does not appear that any representation was made. … In Brown v.