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.
Josephine M. L. Fleet, Appellant, v. Charles H. Kalbfleisch et al., as Executors, etc., Respondents, 1889 — 117 N.Y. 659 · caselaw · US
General
Josephine M. L. Fleet, Appellant, v. Charles H. Kalbfleisch et al., as Executors, etc., Respondents
117 N.Y. 659·New York Court of Appeals·1889·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
Josephine M. L. Fleet, Appellant, v. Charles H. Kalbfleisch et al., as Executors, etc., Respondents.
(Argued December 9, 1889;
decided December 20, 1889.)
Appeal from order of the General Term of the Supreme -Court in the second judicial department, made May 12, 1881, which reversed an order of Special Term granting a new trial.
Edward B. Kissam for appellant.
William N. Dykman for respondents.
[MAJORITY]
Agree to dismiss appeal; no opinion.
All concur.
Appeal dismissed.