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.
Matilda C. Brees, Respondent, v. Charles H. Brees et al., Appellants, 1899 — 159 N.Y. 526 · caselaw · US
General
Matilda C. Brees, Respondent, v. Charles H. Brees et al., Appellants
159 N.Y. 526·New York Court of Appeals·1899·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
Matilda C. Brees, Respondent, v. Charles H. Brees et al., Appellants.
Brees v. Brees, 38 App. Div. 636, appeal dismissed.
(Argued April 17, 1899;
decided April 25,1899.)
Motion to dismiss appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the third judicial department, entered October 12, 1898, modifying and, as modified, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon the report of a referee.
The motion w*as made upon the ground that the appellants, having received a benefit under the judgment directed by the Appellate Division, had waived their right to appeal.
William H. Andrews for motion.
Vasco P. Abbott opposed.
[MAJORITY]
Motion granted and appeal dismissed, with costs.