oration, and that all its officers who might re- | Code Civ. Proc. 8 779.-Bernheimer v. Harteive service were far from the state, held not mayer (Sup.) 816. ecessary to sustain service on a managing gent.-Perrine Sup.) 698. v. Ransom CORRECTION. Gas-Mach. Co. of assessment of taxes, see "Taxation," § 4. Of judgment, see "Judgment," § 3. COSTS. CO-TENANCY. See "Tenancy in Common." COUNTIES. See "Municipal Corporations." Effect of consolidation with city on contracts of n particular actions or proceedings, see "As-§ supplementary proceedings, see "Execution," § 2. will contest, see "Wills," § 3. On offer of judgment in municipal court, see "Courts," § 3. 1. Nature, grounds, and extent of right in general. On an application for taxation of the fees of n appraiser, in proceedings by the city of New York to acquire a site for a city hall, costs of motion as defined by Code Civ. Proc. § 768, hould be taxed, and not of a special proceed ng as defined by section 3334.-In re City of New York (Sup.) 178. 2. Security for payment. Vacating an order requiring plaintiff to give security for costs held erroneous, where the delay in the application therefor was caused y plaintiff.-Cooke v. Metropolitan St. Ry. Co. (Sup.) 4. In an action entitled "W. F. U., Receiver of E. H. & Co., against S. H.," defendant is not entitled to an order requiring plaintiff to give security for costs, where the action is brought En plaintiff's own right individually, and not in his right as receiver.-Upson V. Hesselson Sup.) 684. 3. Amount, rate, and items. Where a complaint to recover a statutory penalty imposed for the refusal of a corporation to exhibit its books was dismissed, defendant held not entitled to an extra allowance.-Lozier v. Saratoga Gas, Electric Light & Power Co. (Sup.) 247; Same v. Roohan, Id. Taxpayer, successful in restraining unauthorEzed issue of city bonds, held entitled to extra allowance.-Chase v. City of Syracuse (Sup.) § 2. Claims against county. Where a surgeon, entitled to compensation from a county for post mortem examinations as provided by Laws 1873, c. 833, § 2, as amended by Laws 1874, c. 535, § 2, submits his claim to audit, he cannot thereafter sue the county as if no audit had been made.-Foy v. Westchester County (Sup.) 887. COURTS. Appointment of receiver in supplementary pro- Review of decisions, see "Appeal." § 1. Nature, extent, and exercise of ju- Evidence held to support a finding that a person was a resident of New York City, and hence under the jurisdiction of the municipal court.-Lawrence v. Freeman (Sup.) 6. Receiver of judgment debtor, suing on a judgment of a county court, held entitled to prove that debtor was a resident of the county in which it was obtained.-Breen v. Henry (Sup.) 627. 8 2. Establishment, organization, and procedure in general. On an appeal from a judgment of the special term, entered in accordance with a decision on an appeal to the general term, the appellate division will follow the decision of the general term as far as the questions at issue are identical.-Abbey v. Wheeler (Sup.) 432. § 3. Courts of limited or inferior juris diction. Where plaintiff appealed from judgment for defendant in municipal court for more than $50, on offer of judgment by plaintiff, defendant is entitled to costs granted by Laws 1898, c. 101, creating the municipal court.-Lauffer v. Bast (Sup.) 874. Under Greater New York Charter, § 1364, subd. 14, and Code Civ. Proc. §§ 2862, 3215, 3343, subd. 10, an action for damages for fraud is within the jurisdiction of the New York City municipal court.-Chase v. Herr (Sup.) 908. and 103 New York State Reporter Under Code Civ. Proc. §§ 2862, 3215, 3343, |§ 3. Preliminary complaint, affidavit and Greater New York Charter, § 1364, subd. 14, the municipal court of the city of New York has jurisdiction of actions for deceit.-Agresta v. Hart (Sup.) 1031. See "Assignments for Benefit of Creditors"; "Bankruptcy"; "Creditors' Suit"; "Fraudulent Conveyances." Remedies against surety, see "Principal and Surety," § 2. Rights as to chattel mortgage by debtor, see "Chattel Mortgages," § 1. Subrogation to rights of creditor, see "Subrogation." CREDITORS' SUIT. Remedies in cases of assignments, see "Assignments for Benefit of Creditors," § 4. A complaint in a suit by a creditor to reach the surplus income of a trust fund, as provided by Laws 1896, c. 547, § 78, held defective in failing to show that the fund or parties were within the jurisdiction of the court.-Sherman v. Tucker (Sup.) 850. CRIMINAL CONVERSATION. See "Husband and Wife," § 5. CRIMINAL LAW. 1. Nature and elements of crime and defenses in general. In a prosecution for conspiring falsely to maintain an action, the fact that defendants were incidentally guilty of subornation of perjury did not operate as a merger of the offense charged.-People v. Petersen (Sup.) 941. 2. Former jeopardy. After new trial granted with defendant's assent, without any statement that it is because the evidence was insufficient to convict, defendant cannot insist, on application for a certificate of reasonable doubt, that he would be put twice in jeopardy.-People v. Shields (Sup.) 620. warrant, examination, commit. ment, and summary trial. Greater New York Charter, § 1406, does not take away the right of the grand jury to indi for a misdemeanor before proceedings are been commenced against the offender in special sessions.-People v. McCarthy (Sup.) 513. Under Pen. Code, § 294, subd. 1. a complaint in a criminal prosecution for abortion et have alleged the offense with sufficient partiolarity to sustain a warrant for defendant's as rest. In re O'Neill (Sup.) 617. § 4. Evidence. Under Laws 1880, c. 36, as amended by Laws 1888, c. 555, experts cannot testify by the use of standards that check found on body of E ant, accused of the murder; the sole issue be dered woman was in the handwriting of defens ing whether the woman had been killed by de fendant.-People v. Kennedy (Sup.) 470. 5. Time of trial and continuance. In a prosecution for conspiring falsely to institute and maintain an action, it was no ground for continuance that the action was still pending.-People v. Petersen (Sup.) 941. § 6. Trial. It is too late, after verdict, to raise for the first time the objection that the evidence in a criminal trial did not show that the crime was committed in the county where the trial was held.-People v. Cooper (Sup.) 257. § 7. Appeal. Technical error in the admission of harmless evidence in a prosecution for perjury held va sufficient ground for a certificate of reasonable doubt.-People v. Doody (Sup.) 724. CUSTODY. Of child, see "Divorce," § 4. Of property levied on, see "Attachment," } & CUSTOMS AND USAGES. Effect on insurance policy, see "Insurance," § L DAMAGES. See "Death," § 1; "Replevin," § 2. Change of street grade by railroad, see “Railroads," § 2. Compensation for property taken for public use, see "Eminent Domain," §§ 1, 2. Ejection of passengers, see "Carriers," § 3. 8 1. Grounds and subjects of compen satory damages. Damages for breach of contract, arising from peculiar circumstances not known to the de faulting party, held not recoverable.-Brazer V. Oceanic Steam Navigation Co. (Sup.) 46% of contract held too remote.-Brauer v. Oceanie Damages for loss of profits through breach Steam Navigation Co. (Sup.) 465. A party suffering from breach of contract must reduce his damages as far as possible auer v. Oceanic Steam Navigation Co. (Sup.) | sidewalk under a resolution permitting erection of a fence there.-Rudolph v. Ackerman (Sup.) 68. 5. 2. Inadequate and excessive damages. Where plaintiff, a young man, received inries necessitating the amputation of a leg, verdict for $7,000 held not excessive.-Cosselon v. Dunfee (Sup.) 271. $3,500 held not excessive damages for injuries ceived at a street-car crossing.-Mowbray v. rooklyn Heights R. Co. (Sup.) 435. A verdict for damages for failure to deliver ocks and bonds should not be set aside as cessive, where there is evidence on which e value may properly be found to equal the nount of the verdict.-Weigley v. Kneeland jup.) 657. 3. Pleading, evidence, and assessment. Conflicting evidence as to the cause and exnt of plaintiff's injuries held to render the uestion of the extent of her injuries one for he jury.-Fox v. Union Turnpike Co. (Sup.) 51. DEATH. ee "Municipal Corporations," § 6. of employé, see "Master and Servant," § 2. DEEDS. See "Easements," § 1. ances. Deed as will, see "Wills," § 2. 1. Requisites and validity. A deed executed to discharge the grantor's obligation to the grantee for care and support furnished will not be set aside merely because the consideration is not equal to the value of the property transferred.-Hennessy v. Corneille (Sup.) 1126. § 2. Construction and operation. In an action by the owner of property adjacent to a wharf to restrain the construction of an abutting pier, held, that plaintiff's deed to the adjacent land did not include the title to the wharf.-India Wharf Brewing Co. v. Brooklyn Wharf & Warehouse Co. (Sup.) 274. DEFAMATION. See "Libel and Slander." DEFAULT. 1. Actions for causing death. A verdict for $10,000 for the death of plainff's intestate, a brakeman, through the neggence of defendant, held not excessive under he evidence.-Douglass v. Northern Cent. Ry. Judgment by, see "Judgment," § 1. Co. (Sup.) 370. A verdict of $10,000 for the death of a woman 49 years of age and in good health, hrough the negligence of the defendant raiload company, held excessive.-Smith v. Lehigh Val. R. Co. (Sup.) 1112. DEBTOR AND CREDITOR. See "Assignments for Benefit of Creditors"; "Bankruptcy"; "Creditors' Suit"; "Fraudulent Conveyances." DECEDENTS. Estates, see "Executors and Administrators." Testimony as to transactions with persons since deceased, see "Witnesses," § 1. DECLARATIONS. As evidence in civil actions, see "Evidence," § 7. DEDICATION. 1. Nature and requisites. A statute making a village a separate road listrict, and its streets highways 60 feet wide, was an acceptance of a street of that width dedicated by the plat; and hence an abutting owner was not entitled to build 5 feet on the 69 N.Y.S.-74 DELIVERY. Of goods sold, see "Sales," § 2. DEMONSTRATIVE LEGACIES. See "Wills," § 4. DEMURRER. In pleading, see "Equity," § 2; "Pleading," § 4. DENIALS. In pleading, see "Pleading," § 3. DEPOSITIONS. See "Witnesses." DEPOSITS. In bank, see "Banks and Banking," § 1. DESCENT AND DISTRIBUTION. See "Executors and Administrators." DESCRIPTION. and 103 New York State Reporter DISTRIBUTION. Of devisees or legatees in will, see “Wills,” § 3. | Of estate of decedent, see "Executors and A ministrators," § 4. Of proceeds of foreclosure, see "Mortgages § 1. The settlement of a suit for divorce come menced by a husband, not having positive proc of the adultery of the wife, held not to be a condonation which would prevent the use of such facts as a defense to a suit for the wife for a divorce for the husband's desertionDeisler v. Deisler (Sup.) 326. The misconduct of a wife held sufficient der Code Civ. Proc. § 1765, to defeat a suit for divorce on the ground of the husband's deser tion.-Deisler v. Deisler (Sup.) 326. § 2. Jurisdiction, proceedings, and relief. The contention that plaintiff was entitled to notice of an application by defendant for the modification of a decree of divorce, so as to Physical examination of defendant in suit to low defendant's remarriage, on the ground that annul marriage, see "Marriage." § 1. In equity. There is no authority under the Code to grant under a bill in equity a discovery of books, papers, etc.-Baylis v. Bullock Electric Mfg. Co. (Sup.) 693. § 2. Under statutory provisions. Order to examine adverse party before trial will not be granted, unless it is shown that material facts are peculiarly within his knowledge. -Bagley v. Winslow (Sup.) 611. Code, § 872, par. 7, does not authorize an order compelling the production of the books of a corporation for examination by the adverse party in a suit.-Duffy v. Consolidated Gas Co. (Sup.) 635. In an action for the dissolution of a partnership, neither party is entitled to examine the other before trial, except as to subjects of which the interlocutory judgment for an accounting may make some disposition and which lie peculiarly in the knowledge of the adverse party. Bernheimer v. Schmid (Sup.) 659. DISORDERLY CONDUCT. it would preclude plaintiff's right to subsequent ly apply for alimony, held not sustainable.-la re Salmon (Sup.) 215. service of a notice of defendant's application to Code Civ. Proc. § 780, held not to require the modify a decree of divorce in favor of plaintif so as to allow defendant to remarry. In re | Salmon (Sup.) 215. Evidence in a divorce case held insufficiest to establish defendant's adultery.-Pessolano v. Pessolano (Sup.) 449. Evidence by a co-respondent is insufficient to show adultery, unless corroborated.-Delling v. Delling (Sup.) 479. .In divorce, proof must be clear that the summons was served on the defendant named therein.-Delling v. Delling (Sup.) 479. A paragraph of complaint in divorce held sufficiently definite and certain as to the dates. places at which, and the persons with whom the acts charged were committed.-Woog v. Woog (Sup.) 555. A complaint in divorce, together with statements of affidavit opposing motion to make the complaint more definite, held not to have justified denial of the motion. Woog v. Woog Habeas corpus to review conviction, see "Ha- (Sup.) 555. beas Corpus," § 1. DISSOLUTION. Of foreign corporations, see "Corporations," § 8. Of partnership, see "Partnership," § 2. Identification of defendant in divorce by process server by means of photograph as the person on whom he had served process held insufficient.-Bigelow v. Bigelow (Sup.) 643. Testimony of eyewitness of adultery of defendant, identifying her from a photograph lentified by her husband, held insufficient to ustain decree.-Bigelow v. Bigelow (Sup.) 643. 3. Alimony, allowances, and disposition of property. Receiver, in sequestration proceedings against usband on failure to pay alimony to wife, canot sue without leave of court.-Garden v. Garen (Sup.) 481. A wife held entitled to sue, in aid of seques-ation proceedings on failure of her husband to ay alimony, to compel payment of legacy due he husband to the receiver in sequestration roceedings.-Garden v. Garden (Sup.) 481. 4. Custody and support of children. Under Code Civ. Proc. § 1771, an application modify a decree of divorce rendered prior to 895, as to the custody of a child, cannot be aintained.—In re Haworth (Sup.) 843. acquired an easement over the wharf by pre- An uninterrupted enjoyment of a right of § 2. Extent of right, use, and obstruction. Subsequent grantees held not entitled to be made co-plaintiffs in an action by the grantor against an elevated railway company for obstructing the right to light and air.-Scholle v. Metropolitan El. Ry. Co. (Sup.) 1118. § 2. Pleading and evidence. Answer in complaint in ejectment held not see demurrable, as not stating specifically that defendant's possession was justified by a contract of sale.-Sample v. Lyons (Sup.) 378. tion. 1. Creation, existence, and termina-viding for bicycle paths, do not impose an addiLaws 1899, c. 152, and Laws 1900, c. 640, proWhere plaintiff owned the title in fee to part tional burden on the highways for which abutf a public street adjoining his property, and ting owners are entitled to compensation.efendant had constructed and maintained for Ryan v. Preston (Sup.) 100. assess compensation. 0 years a railroad under authority from the § 2. Proceedings to take property and ty, held, that defendant had not acquired a ght by prescription to warrant the elevation A judgment for plaintiff in condemnation prof the railroad, as such acquired right applied ceedings, awarding condemnation and appointnly to the operation of a surface railroad.-ing commissioners to appraise value, is not an ander v. New York & H. R. Co. (Sup.) 155. order finally determining such proceedings, so Where the owner of property adjacent to a as to entitle the defendant to appeal therefrom. harf was given the right to use the same by Erie R. Co. v. Steward (Sup.) 57. is deed of conveyance, and for a number of ears did use the wharf, held, that he had not No appeal can be taken under Code Civ. Proc. 1356, by the defendant from a judgment for |