« PreviousContinue »
3. The statute prohibiting sheriffs and other
officers from taking bonds in any other
4. A surety on a bond given to the sheriff to
indemnify him for levying, attaching, and
Procedure, $S 1421 to 1425, authorizing
treasurer, or in the absence of a president or
Am. Mining Stock Exchange, 328.
in $ 1919 of the Code, mean a president or
order of publication that defendant is a
v. The N. Y. Life Ins. & Trust Co., 568.
not after due diligence be found in the
an order of publication.—Id.
1. In an action for services plaintiff testified
that defendant agreed to pay him a propor-
stand. - Sherwood v. Hauser, 301.
whole of the day upon which services were
by 8 708, Sub. 3 of the Code, in case of in-
erty.--Scott et al. v. Morgan, 413.
rant of attachment by delivering a copy of
Nat'l Bank, 503.
Civil Pro., adjusts the sheriff's fees and ex-
U. 8. Reflector Co., 504.
judge who issued the warrant of attach-
See Costs, 5–7, 10; EXECUTORS, &c., 5.
local. - Roach v. Odell, 204.
and with diligence and the action is based
and no power to do so is conferred upon
fixed at $10 per day while employed and
v. The Union Pacific RR. Co., 426.
LAW, 4 ; CORPORATIONS, 22 ; DISORDERLY
STATUTE OF FRAUDS.
See ATTORNEYS, 2.
1. Evidence by defendant as to prior difficul-
ties or malice between him and plaintiff is
malice on his part.-Crowell v. Day, 97.
character and import as those clrarged in
tion to annoy or oppress plaintiff is neces-
STOPPAGE IN TRANSITU.
See INJUNCTION, 5.
Sec CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, 3, 4, 6, 7; EMI-
NENT DOMAIN, 10, 11 ; RAILROADS, 2, 3.
from plaintiff, which they were to use with
son v. Brooks, 61.
performance it is sufficient that his case is
doubt or difficulty.-Id.
1. The affidavit required by $ 1279 of the Code
cannot be made by attorney where there
2. Where it appears that the controversy has
been created for the express purpose of be-
STATUTE OF FRAUDS.
See FRAUD, 11, 14-17.
1. Statutory repeal by implication is not fa-
vored and courts are bound to uphold the
Baird v. The Mayor, &c., of N. Y., 39.
1866, providing that the compensation and
1. One who, at the request of another, ad-
vances money to redeem or even to pay off
Thieme et al. 69.
bered by a mortgage. His widow, who
the benefit of the estate, and that as against livery in violation of that condition will not
5. If a surety, on executing an undertaking
required by the Code to be given in an ac-
by a second mortgage on condition that the dition, the filing of such undertaking in
waiver of such desect by the party entitled
to take advantage of it will not have the
effect of binding the surety.-Id.
undertaking in violation of the condition
in supplementary proceedings reciting the surety would be liable.-Id.
7. Where sureties in an undertaking on ap-
peal become insolvent and the court orders
a new undertaking filed within 20 days, or
in default thereof judgment to be enforcea-
ble as if no undertaking had been given,and
the order is not complied with, the respond-
from liability. Their election to issue and
rely upon execution precludes them from
pursuing the surcties upon the undertaking.
– Collins v. Ball, 352.
8. The extension by the payee of the time
of payment of a note, upon an executory
usurious agreement with the maker, which
the latter did not perform, does not release
a surety.– Thayer v. King, 474.
lay to proceed against the principal the
surety must show explicit notice or request
to the creditor to take such proceedings.-
See INJUNCTION, 6; LEASE, 7; MORTGAGE, 11,
18; SHERIFFS, 4
1. In the settlement of an administrator's ac.
count, the Surrogate referred the matter to
for faithful performance, evidence that its confirmation was regularly moved for
dition that it is not to be delivered until agent or trusted to account.-- Woodruff v.
3. The Surrogate has the power, the neces- 10. Under an order referring an administra-
sary facts being shown, to make the orders tor's account to a referee to examine and
LIMITATION, 5; VERIFICATION; WILLS, 4,
See NEGLIGENCE, 33.
SUSPENSION OF RIGHTS.
See APPEAL, 23, 24.
nevolent corporation, is all lawfully devot.
ed to the care, custody, education and
maintenance of destitute mothers and chil-
dren, it is exempt by law from taxation,
and an equitable action will lie to set aside
a tax imposed thereon.— The N. Y. Infant
Asylum v. The Board of Supervisors of West-
chester Co. et al., 274.
3. When the period allowed by law for the
purposes of taxation by the Commissioners
of Taxes and Assessments of the City of
New York expires between the death of a
decedent and the issuing of letters testa-
mentary to the persons named as executors
in his will, such tax may be imposed upon
such persons as executors, although they
have not yet qualified as such and received
their letters testamentary, and they are the
iion of such tax.- T'he People ex rel. Cou-
dert et al. v. Comrs. of Taxes, 368.
4. The Commissioners of Taxes and Assess-
ments in the City of New York may tax
personal property belonging to the estate
and assess the value of such personal prop-
claims against such estate, and, consequent-
ly, before the executors can obtain accurate
knowledge of the amount of such personal
uation will be conclusive in the absence of
any evidence furnished to the Commission-
crs by the executors showing that it is ex-
the City of New York applies to the Tax
Commissioners of said city for a reduction
See ConstituTIONAL LAW, 5.
TENANTS IN COMMON.
Sec ConverSION, 1; REDEMPTION, 2.
See Evidence, 17; PARTIES, 3.
authorized by the statnte under which it
County Judge had jurisdiction of the pro-
ceedings notwithstanding the determination
of said County Judge pursuant to $ 2 of
ing that no jurisdiction, in fact, existed in
the County Judge. --Id.
charge their duties they should not be signers would constitute less than the ma-
signatures a condition that the road should
run through a certain town, which would
within and partly beyond the limits of this other petitioners. Held. That the desire
1. After relator recovered a judgment against
the town of Kingston the town was di.
vided. A mandamus requiring defendant
to levy the amount of the judgment on the
several towns into which Kingston was
divided was reversed by the General Term.
Held, No error; that relator has a plain
remedy by mandamus to compel a meeting
by them of the duties devolved upon them
by the Revised Statutes.- The People ex rel.
Ulster Co., 220.
2. Chap. 554, Laws of 1880, applies
the collection of judgments against towns
which have not been divided or altered. -
See CONTRACT, 13: MORTGAGE 13.