Case law

Taylor v. Metropolitan Elevated Railway Co.

18 Jones & S. 311 · The Superior Court of New York City · May 5, 1884

The Mayor of Brooklyn, 4 Comst. 195; Gould v. Hudson R. R. R. Co., 2 Seld. 522; Bellinger v. N. Y. C. R. R. Co., 23 N. Y. 42 ; People v. Kerr, 27 Id. 193; Corey v. Buffalo, &c. R. R. Co., 23 Barb. 482 ; Getty v. … In Cobb v.

Hovey v. Elliott

29 Jones & S. 409 · The Superior Court of New York City · Oct 24, 1892

Judges Follett and Brown concurred in this dissent. … “ McVeigh v. U.

Ogden v. Astor

6 Sandf. 311 · The Superior Court of New York City · Dec 28, 1850

R. 88,) Lonsdale v. Brasluor, (3 Munroe, 330,) Patterson v. Brown, (6 Ibid. 10.) The opinions expressed in these cases all rest on a dictum reported in Bridges v. … That such is the law with regard to all mutual accounts, whether mercantile or not, appears by many adjudged cases; see particularly Kimball v. Brown, ( 7 Wend. 322 ,) Chamberlain v. Cuyler, (9 Ibid. 126,) Sickles v.

Wilkins v. Earle

19 Abb. Pr. 190 · The Superior Court of New York City · Jun 15, 1865

It is a well-established principle, that in the amount charged for the keep and board of the traveller, the innkeeper receives the consideration for the safe keeping of his guest, his •goods, and his money (2 Kent's Com., … chief-justice, in his able opinion, denies the sufficiency of the notice given by the plaintiff to the defendants of the contents of the package, when it was intrusted to the defendant for deposit in his safe, and says, that V

Currie v. White

1 Sweeny 166 · The Superior Court of New York City · May 3, 1869

plaintiffs, the question was whether or not one McCaster had an insurable interest in a certain quantity of guano, at the time of effecting tire policy, and the judge charged the jury to the effect that, if the guano was put on board … V.

Fry v. Bennett

16 Bosw. 200 · The Superior Court of New York City · Jul 3, 1858

(V.) … (Brown and others v. Duncan, 10 Barn. & Cres., 93.) (Point IX.) The admission of the programme in evidence could not have prejudiced the defendant.

Oakley v. Aspinwall

1 Duer 1 · The Superior Court of New York City · May 15, 1852

(Staples *43 v. Fairchild, 3 Coms. 41-42. In the matter of Brown, 21 Wend. 316 .) … No more in that respect appears to have been stated in the application in Staples v. Fairchild (4 Coms. 44), or in the matter of Brown ( 21 Wend. 316 .)

Currie v. White

6 Abb. Pr. 352 · The Superior Court of New York City · Mar 15, 1869

plaintiffs, the question was whether or not one McCaster had an • insurable interest in a certain quantity of guano, at the time of effecting the policy, and the judge charged the jury to the effect that, if the guano was put on board … Pinney, 7 Cow., 681 ; Taylor v. Read, 7 Paige, 561 ; Dey v. Dox, 9 Wend., 129 ; Davis v. Shields, 24 Id., 322; *386 Beals v. Terry, 2 Sandf., 127 ; Dana v. Fiedler, 12 N. Y [2 Kern.], 40 ; Norton v.

Jourdan v. Haran

24 Jones & S. 185 · The Superior Court of New York City · Oct 25, 1888

In McKeen v. … Willard on Real Estate, &c., p. 63 ; Scribner on Dower, Vol. 1, p. 326; Elwood v. Klock, 13 Barb. 50 ; Lawrence v. Brown, 7 N. Y. 394 . *202 By the Court.—Freedman, J. There is practically no dispute as to the facts.

Knapp v. New York and Harlem Railroad

2 Bosw. 297 · The Superior Court of New York City · Dec 12, 1857

(Chapman v. Bluck, 4 Bing. N. C. 187; Doe ex den Pearson v. Ries, 8 Bing. R. 180.) … In Cary v.

Sixth Avenue Railroad v. Gilbert Elevated Railroad

41 Jones & S. 489 · The Superior Court of New York City · Mar 15, 1877

I have consulted among others, the following cases : Wynehamer v. People, 13 N. Y. 378 ; Schenectady & Saratoga Plank Road Co. v. Thatcher, 11 Id. 113; Syracuse City Bank v. Davis, 16 Barb. 189 ; Warner v. … Co. v. Dudley, 14 N. Y. 348 ; White v. Syracuse & Utica R. R. Co., 14 Barb. 559 ; Olcott v. Tioga R. R. Co., 20 N. Y. 210 ; People v. Allen, 42 Id. 379; People ex rel. City of Rochester v. Briggs, 50 Id. 533; Corning v.

Bolton v. Jacks

6 Rob. 166 · The Superior Court of New York City · Apr 15, 1868

Kinnard, Holcomb v. Phelps, Dyckman v. … Scott, Holcomb v. Phelps and Dyckman v.

In re Christern

56 How. Pr. 5 · The Superior Court of New York City · Oct 15, 1878

Prior to 1870 false swearing by either applicant or witness in a state court could only he punished, as decided in The People v. Sweetman ( 3 Park. … perjury, could not, prior to 1870, be punished criminally at all unless the particular offense could be brought within the thirteenth section of the act of March 3, 1813, entitled “An act for the regulation of seamen on board

De Forest v. Fulton Fire Insurance

1 Hall 84 · The Superior Court of New York City · Aug 15, 1828

And in the case of Stirling v. … Le Cras v. Hughes.

Genet v. President, Managers & Company of the Delaware & Hudson Canal Co.

24 Jones & S. 27 · The Superior Court of New York City · May 10, 1888

Worrall v. Munn, 5 N. Y. 229 ; People v. Bostwic-k, 32 Ib. 445; Cocks v. Barker, 49 Ib. 107; Van Bokkelen v. Taylor, 62 Ib. 105; Wilson v. Dean, 74 Ib. 531, 537; Ridgway v. Bowman. 7 Cush. 268 ; Bast v. Bank, 101 U. … Morgan v. City of Binghamton, 102 N. Y. 500 ; People v. Canal Board, 55 Ib., 390, 397.

Nicholson v. Leavitt

6 Sandf. 252 · The Superior Court of New York City · Dec 28, 1850

In Rogers v. … Upon this point the decision of Lord Thurlow, in Ex parte Clures, (2 Brown’s Ch. R. 595,) and that of Chancellor Walworth, in Hutchinson v. Smith, (7 Paige, 26 ,) seem to us very applicable and decisive authorities.

Atlantic & Pacific Telegraph Co. v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad

14 Jones & S. 377 · The Superior Court of New York City · Dec 6, 1880

Watts v. … In Massie v.

Langdon v. Astor

3 Duer 477 · The Superior Court of New York City · Jul 1, 1854

Kirk v. … Brown C. C. 353 ; Bowel on Devises by Jarman, p. 49, note). I think that it was very properly cited, and has a direct and important bearing.