Case law

Suydam v. Barber

6 Duer 34 · The Superior Court of New York City · Jun 15, 1856

Brayle v. … In Candee v. Clark & Brown (2 Michigan Rep. 255) the plaintiff had recovered, in a court in Ohio, a judgment against one of the parties to a promissory note, signed in their partnership name.

Kenny v. Cunard S. S. Co.

20 Jones & S. 434 · The Superior Court of New York City · Dec 7, 1885

B. 33 ; Lovegrove v. The London, Brighton & S. C. Ry. Co., 16 C. B. [N. S.] 669). … Ct. 460 ; Slater v. Jewett, 85 N. Y. 61 ; Barringer v. Del. & Hudson Co., 19 Hun, 216 ; Crispin v. Babbitt, 81 N. Y. 516 ).

People ex rel. Johnson v. New York Produce Exchange

59 N.Y. St. Rep. 531 · The Superior Court of New York City · May 15, 1894

Page v. Board of Trade, 45 Ill. 112 . … See Hurst v. N. Y Produce Exchange, 100 N. Y. 605 . We are inclined to hold that the board had jurisdiction.

Demuth v. American Institute

10 Jones & S. 336 · The Superior Court of New York City · May 8, 1877

v. … If this was an agreement at all, it was, in the language quoted by Brown v. New York Central R. R. Co.

Stuyvesant v. Browning

1 Jones & S. 203 · The Superior Court of New York City · Apr 1, 1871

Brown, 7 Barb. 81 ; Van Valen v. Lapham, 13 How. Pr. 243 ). In that way the defendant can fairly raise the questions presented by his answer, and afterwards review any decision which may be rendered against him. … These views are strictly in accordance with Ombony v. Jones ( 19 N. Y. 232 ), and Loonie v. Hogan (9 Id. 435). The latter case is quatuor pedibus with the one now before us.

Guidet v. Mayor of New York

4 Jones & S. 557 · The Superior Court of New York City · Dec 31, 1873

When the strict performance of a condition precedent is unreasonably prevented by the other party, its performance should be excused (People v. Bartlett, 3 Hill, 570 ; Niblo v. Binsse, 44 Barb. 54 ; Moses v. … Y. 462 ; Glacius v. Black, 50 N. Y. 148 ; Cohen v. Mutual Life Insurance Co., 50 N. Y 621). There was no evidence of any distinct "appointment of inspectors for the work by the Croton Board.

Davis v. Kinney

1 Abb. Pr. 440 · The Superior Court of New York City · May 15, 1855

The case of Brown v. Delafield, 1 Denio, 445 , cited by defendant’s counsel, does not sustain the position taken by him.

Union Bank of Sandusky v. Torrey

2 Abb. Pr. 269 · The Superior Court of New York City · Nov 15, 1855

Walworth, Chancellor, (Brown v. Davis, 25 Wend., 259 ), although he distinguishes this case from that then before the court, approves the decision.

Crawford v. Delaware, Lackawanna & Western Railroad

22 Jones & S. 262 · The Superior Court of New York City · Feb 14, 1887

Brown, her employer, and there were two other persons in the carriage ; one on the seat occupied by Mrs. Brown, and one on the seat occupied by the plaintiff. … And in Dyer v. Erie R. R. Co., 71 N.

Gerlach v. Edelmeyer

15 Jones & S. 292 · The Superior Court of New York City · Apr 4, 1881

. & W. 499 ; Michael v. Stanton, 3 Hun, 462 ; Annett v. Foster; 1 Daly, 502 , and cases there cited). … Ordinary care is such a degree of care, skill and diligence, as men of ordinary prudence, under similar circumstances, usually employ (Brown v.

Carraher v. Carraher

11 Abb. Pr. 338 · The Superior Court of New York City · Nov 15, 1871

He is not precluded from doing that, and consequently is still at liberty to raise such questions as appear upon the face of the judgment roll and might formerly have been raised on a writ of error (Brown v. … Pr., 366 ; in Phelps v. Swan, 2 Sweeny, 696 ; and Ward v. Central Park, North & East River R. R.

Burnham v. Acton

4 Abb. Pr. 1 · The Superior Court of New York City · Apr 15, 1868

I referred to several cases in support of these distinctions (Pierce v. Kimball, 9 Greenl., 54; Burnham v. Webster, 5 Mass., 266 ; Jenkins v. Union Turnpike Co., 1 Cai., 86 ; Bank of Utica v. … Smedes, 3 Cow., 684 ; White v. Syracuse & Utica R. R. Co., 14 Barb., 559 ; Herisdia v. Ayres, 12 Pick., 344 ).

Lakeman v. Grinnell

5 Bosw. 625 · The Superior Court of New York City · Dec 31, 1859

(Watkinson v. Laughton, 8 J. R., 213; Amory v. McGregor, 15 id., 24; Bracket v. McNair, 14 id., 170; Brandt v. Bowlby, 2 Barn. & Ad., 932 ; Gillingham v. Dempsey, 12 Serg. & Rawle, 188 .) … Delamater v.

Kelley v. Upton

5 Duer 336 · The Superior Court of New York City · Feb 15, 1856

In Decker v. Furniss, ( 3 Duer, 292 ,) the instrument, which related to the sale of a steamboat, began with the words, “ W. H. Brown sells to M. P. … (Lester v. Jewett, 1 Kern. 454.)

Wood v. Mayor of New York

12 Jones & S. 321 · The Superior Court of New York City · Nov 4, 1878

Mayor, &c., 1 Seld. 285; Smith v. Mayor, &c., 37 N. Y. 518 ; * McVeany v. Mayor, &c., 1 Hun, 35 ). The order setting aside the verdict and ordering a new trial must be affirmed with costs. Speer, J., concurred. Note. … Compare Dolan v. Mayor, &c., of New York, 68 N. Y. 274 .

Schermerhorn v. Niblo

2 Bosw. 161 · The Superior Court of New York City · Nov 28, 1857

S., p. 100, § 1, marginal paging; Laws of 1837, p. 536, § 72; Laws of 1843, p. 228, § 1; Hyde v. Tanner, 1 Barb. S. C. R. 75; Ferguson v. Brown, 1 Bradford R. 10.) 2. … (Winne v. Reynolds, 6 Paige, 407 and 413; Belmont v. O’Brien, 2 Kern. 395; Seymour v. Delaney, Hopkins’ R. 436; Spring v. Sandford, 7 Paige, 550 .)

Shafer v. Guest

6 Rob. 264 · The Superior Court of New York City · Apr 15, 1868

Any liability under the agreement with the defendant for damages in not boarding, pursuant to it, would not be the subject of a lien, even if the special agreement did not altogether defeat, one. (Trust v. … Thus limiting the lien to that for board actually due, and not including board to become due under an agreement to board in future.

Turner v. Martin

4 Rob. 661 · The Superior Court of New York City · Dec 30, 1865

. *663 The action is to recover the “ reasonable worth ” of a quantity of brown stone furnished to the defendant. Eo special agreement is set forth, containing any terms of a contract between the parties. … (Hallock v. Losee, 1 Sandf. 220 . Peck v. N. Y. and Liv. S. S. Co., 5 Bosw. 226 . Davis v. Gorton, 16 N. Y: Rep. 255.)

Martin v. Farnsworth

1 Jones & S. 246 · The Superior Court of New York City · Apr 1, 1871

Such authority is absolutely necessary for the safety of the ship and the lives of all persons on board.” … See also opinion of Judge Ware (Butler v.

Scholle v. Scholle

23 Jones & S. 474 · The Superior Court of New York City · Apr 9, 1888

Romaine Brown, whereupon it was stipulated that Brown should be bound by the printed terms of sale. Subsequently Mr. … In Russell v. Russell, 36 N.