authorities sustain principle in New York

1867The case presumes *4 that a person taking the life of another, with a deadly weapon, intends to do it, and if a sane man so intends, it makes no. difference whether he had a motive or not, for it is not -necessary to look for a motive, when a person has been so killed with a deadly weapon, or with poison; and, if a man under the influence of passion or intoxication commits a crime, the law holds him responsible for it, though done in the heat of passion, and it is a question for you. to determine, whether the prisoner killed McMillan with premeditation, or whether he acted in the heat of passi

1867(People v. Clark, 7 N. Y., 385 ; People v. Rogers, 18 N. Y, 9; Willis v. People, 32 N. Y., 715 ; Freeman v. People, 4 Den., 9 .) We see no error in permitting the whole conversation which occurred at the time of the'ltilling, in the presence and in the hearing of the prisoner, to be given in. evidence to the jury.

1867The case presumes *4 that a person taking the life of another, with a deadly weapon, intends to do it, and if a sane man so intends, it makes no. difference whether he had a motive or not, for it is not -necessary to look for a motive, when a person has been so killed with a deadly weapon, or with poison; and, if a man under the influence of passion or intoxication commits a crime, the law holds him responsible for it, though done in the heat of passion, and it is a question for you. to determine, whether the prisoner killed McMillan with premeditation, or whether he acted in the heat of passi

1867(People v. Clark, 7 N. Y., 385 ; People v. Rogers, 18 N. Y, 9; Willis v. People, 32 N. Y., 715 ; Freeman v. People, 4 Den., 9 .) We see no error in permitting the whole conversation which occurred at the time of the'ltilling, in the presence and in the hearing of the prisoner, to be given in. evidence to the jury.

1867The case presumes *4 that a person taking the life of another, with a deadly weapon, intends to do it, and if a sane man so intends, it makes no. difference whether he had a motive or not, for it is not -necessary to look for a motive, when a person has been so killed with a deadly weapon, or with poison; and, if a man under the influence of passion or intoxication commits a crime, the law holds him responsible for it, though done in the heat of passion, and it is a question for you. to determine, whether the prisoner killed McMillan with premeditation, or whether he acted in the heat of passi

1867(People v. Clark, 7 N. Y., 385 ; People v. Rogers, 18 N. Y, 9; Willis v. People, 32 N. Y., 715 ; Freeman v. People, 4 Den., 9 .) We see no error in permitting the whole conversation which occurred at the time of the'ltilling, in the presence and in the hearing of the prisoner, to be given in. evidence to the jury.

1932Burby v. Common Council ( 85 Hun, 601 ); Attorney-General v. Tufts ( 239 Mass. 458, 482 ); State v. Welsh ( 109 Iowa, 19, 21-23 ); State ex rel.

1932Burby v. Common Council ( 85 Hun, 601 ); Attorney-General v. Tufts ( 239 Mass. 458, 482 ); State v. Welsh ( 109 Iowa, 19, 21-23 ); State ex rel.

1932Burby v. Common Council ( 85 Hun, 601 ); Attorney-General v. Tufts ( 239 Mass. 458, 482 ); State v. Welsh ( 109 Iowa, 19, 21-23 ); State ex rel.

1926A neglect or refusal to do so gave to the plaintiff an action as for a conversion of the property.” Also in Rothschild v. Allen ( 90 App. Div. 233 ; affd., 180 N. Y. 561 ) Hatch, J., said: “ When they pledged the stock to secure their own loans they did so at the peril of being able to deliver the same if delivery was demanded by the owner and he tendered pay ment.” (Italics not in original.) (See, also, McIntyre v. Whitney, 139 App. Div. 557 ; affd., 201 N. Y. 526 .) The foregoing authorities sustain the principle already noted that shares of stock purchased by a broker must not be pledged, e

1926A neglect or refusal to do so gave to the plaintiff an action as for a conversion of the property.” Also in Rothschild v. Allen ( 90 App. Div. 233 ; affd., 180 N. Y. 561 ) Hatch, J., said: “ When they pledged the stock to secure their own loans they did so at the peril of being able to deliver the same if delivery was demanded by the owner and he tendered pay ment.” (Italics not in original.) (See, also, McIntyre v. Whitney, 139 App. Div. 557 ; affd., 201 N. Y. 526 .) The foregoing authorities sustain the principle already noted that shares of stock purchased by a broker must not be pledged, e

1926(See Mandola v. Wells, 212 App. Div. 370, 373 ; Ryan v. Phipps, 146 id. 642, 646; Richardson v. Babcock & Wilcox Co., 175 Fed. 897 ; 22 L.

1926A neglect or refusal to do so gave to the plaintiff an action as for a conversion of the property.” Also in Rothschild v. Allen ( 90 App. Div. 233 ; affd., 180 N. Y. 561 ) Hatch, J., said: “ When they pledged the stock to secure their own loans they did so at the peril of being able to deliver the same if delivery was demanded by the owner and he tendered pay ment.” (Italics not in original.) (See, also, McIntyre v. Whitney, 139 App. Div. 557 ; affd., 201 N. Y. 526 .) The foregoing authorities sustain the principle already noted that shares of stock purchased by a broker must not be pledged, e

1926A neglect or refusal to do so gave to the plaintiff an action as for a conversion of the property.” Also in Rothschild v. Allen ( 90 App. Div. 233 ; affd., 180 N. Y. 561 ) Hatch, J., said: “ When they pledged the stock to secure their own loans they did so at the peril of being able to deliver the same if delivery was demanded by the owner and he tendered pay ment.” (Italics not in original.) (See, also, McIntyre v. Whitney, 139 App. Div. 557 ; affd., 201 N. Y. 526 .) The foregoing authorities sustain the principle already noted that shares of stock purchased by a broker must not be pledged, e

1926(See Mandola v. Wells, 212 App. Div. 370, 373 ; Ryan v. Phipps, 146 id. 642, 646; Richardson v. Babcock & Wilcox Co., 175 Fed. 897 ; 22 L.

1900(Newell v. Wheeler, 36 N. Y. 244 ; Mygatt v. Wilcox, 45 id. 306 .) And that is upon the theory that the amount may be known or ascertained and computed actually or approximately, by reference to market values. * * * There may be cases from the nature of which it appears that this cannot he done, to which the rule allowing interest is not applicable.” We think the authorities sustain the principle that interest upon an unliquidated claim, even though on contract, should not be awarded unless with reasonable certainty the amount was or could be fixed.

1900(Newell v. Wheeler, 36 N. Y. 244 ; Mygatt v. Wilcox, 45 id. 306 .) And that is upon the theory that the amount may be known or ascertained and computed actually or approximately, by reference to market values. * * * There may be cases from the nature of which it appears that this cannot he done, to which the rule allowing interest is not applicable.” We think the authorities sustain the principle that interest upon an unliquidated claim, even though on contract, should not be awarded unless with reasonable certainty the amount was or could be fixed.

1884The counsel for the respondents relies upon the case of Power v. Cassidy ( 79 N. Y. 602 ; 35 Am.

1881We think that the following authorities sustain the doctrine that finder such circumstances the injunction is continued unless dissolved by express order of the court, viz.: Power v. Village of Athens ( 19 Hun, 165 ); Erie Railroad Company v. Ramsey ( 45 N. Y., 637 ); Sixth Avenue Railroad Company v. Gilbert Elevated Railroad (71 id., 433).

1867The case presumes *4 that a person taking the life of another, with a deadly weapon, intends to do it, and if a sane man so intends, it makes no. difference whether he had a motive or not, for it is not -necessary to look for a motive, when a person has been so killed with a deadly weapon, or with poison; and, if a man under the influence of passion or intoxication commits a crime, the law holds him responsible for it, though done in the heat of passion, and it is a question for you. to determine, whether the prisoner killed McMillan with premeditation, or whether he acted in the heat of passi