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.
Harry Kraus et al., as Executors of Henry P. Sondheim, Deceased, Respondents, v. Nella Sondheim, as Executrix of Samuel Sondheim, Deceased, Appellant, 1905 — 182 N.Y. 514 · caselaw · US
General
Harry Kraus et al., as Executors of Henry P. Sondheim, Deceased, Respondents, v. Nella Sondheim, as Executrix of Samuel Sondheim, Deceased, Appellant
182 N.Y. 514·New York Court of Appeals·1905·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
Harry Kraus et al., as Executors of Henry P. Sondheim, Deceased, Respondents, v. Nella Sondheim, as Executrix of Samuel Sondheim, Deceased, Appellant.
(Argued May 29, 1905;
decided June 6, 1905.)
Reported below, 102 App. Div. 615.
Motion to dismiss an appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered March 1,1905, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiffs entered upon the report of a referee.
The motion was made upon the grounds that the judgment of affirmance in the Appellate Division was unanimous, the exceptions frivolous, the appeal taken for purposes of delay and that permission to appeal had not been given.
Henry Brill for motion.
Charles J. Hardy opposed.
[MAJORITY]
Motion denied, with ten dollars costs.