Volume 16 — Daly's New York Common Pleas Reports

<p>Persons who, with others, have indemnified a sheriff for selling goods of a judgment debtor, cannot escape payment of their share of expenses incurred by the sheriff in defending an action for conversion of the goods, brought against him by the assignee of the debtor for benefit of creditors, on the ground that they represented to the sheriff, when they signed the bond of indemnity, that they had been preferred as creditors and did not wish to attack the assignment, and subsequently, that they did not wish the sheriff to defend the action for conversion.</p> <p>The payment by a sheriff of a fee to his counsel for defending an action creates a legal presumption, in a subsequent action by the sheriff against his indemnitors, that it was a fair and reasonable charge, which is conclusive unléss defendant alleges and proves that it is unreasonable.</p>

<p>A contract to render instructions to another in certain secrets of the art of photography, the instructions to be given on Sunday, is in violation of the prohibition of the Penal Code, as amended by Laws 1883, chapter 358) against labor on Sunday, excepting works of necessity or charity; and no recovery can be had thereon.</p>

<p>Appeal from a judgment of this court entered on a trial by the court without a jury.</p>

<p>At a sale by auction of personal property under a power in a mortgage thereof, defendant became the purchaser on a bid of $325, after other bids, up to $320, had been made. It did not appear that such bids were not made in good faith. The real value of the property was about $400. Held, that defendant could not object to the fairness of the sale, because of a secret agreement between him and the mortgagee that he should pay $325 for the property, and that no one else should get it.</p> <p>Defendant refused to complete the purchase, and told the mortgagee to . sell the property to some one else, and was thereupon told that he would beheld liable for any loss on such resale. The property was then readvertised once, and sold without further notice to defendant. Held, that the finding of a jury that defendant had reasonable and proper notice of the • resale would not be disturbed on appeal, no fraud or bias being shown.</p>

Trial of an action at the Equity Term. The action was brought to restrain defendants from maintaining and operating their elevated railroad in the street in front of certain lots owned by plaintiff, and for damages caused thereby.