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.
Phebe A. Henderson, Respondent, v. Caroline I. Hadden et al., Appellants, 1896 — 151 N.Y. 636 · caselaw · US
General
Phebe A. Henderson, Respondent, v. Caroline I. Hadden et al., Appellants
151 N.Y. 636·New York Court of Appeals·1896·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
Phebe A. Henderson, Respondent, v. Caroline I. Hadden et al., Appellants.
Reported below, 2 App. Div. 617.
(Argued November 30, 1896;
decided December 8, 1896.)
Motion for a new undertaking or to dismiss an appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, rendered at the March term, 1896, which affirmed a judgment in favor of plaintiff.
James Henderson for motion.
[MAJORITY]
Motion granted, and appellants required to file new undertaking and serve copy thereof within twenty days after service of copy of order herein, or the appeal to be dismissed and the order or judgment appealed from executed as if original undertaking had not been given, with ten dollars costs of this motion to respondent to abide event.