Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
Rose Frey, Appellant, v. Francine Fougera et al., as Administrators of the Estate of Cecile L. Fougera, Deceased, Respondent, 1907 — 187 N.Y. 529 · caselaw · US
General
Rose Frey, Appellant, v. Francine Fougera et al., as Administrators of the Estate of Cecile L. Fougera, Deceased, Respondent
187 N.Y. 529·New York Court of Appeals·1907·NY
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
Rose Frey, Appellant, v. Francine Fougera et al., as Administrators of the Estate of Cecile L. Fougera, Deceased, Respondent.
Reported below, 113 App. Div. 913.
(Submitted January 7, 1907;"
decided January 15, 1907.)
Motion to dismiss an appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in ■ the second judicial department, entered June 8, 1906, affirming a judgment in favor of defendants entered upon a decision of the court on trial at Special Term.
The motion was made upon the grounds that the Court of Appeals had no jurisdiction to entertain the appeal, permission to appeal not having been granted, and the appeal not coming within the provisions of subdivision 2 of section 191 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
Charles F. Brandt for motion.
James C. De La Mare opposed.
[MAJORITY]
Motion denied, with ten dollars costs.