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.
William H. Waite, Respondent, v. Nancy Harriet Simons et al., Defendants, Thos. W. Kiley, Purchaser, Appellant, 1890 — 121 N.Y. 712 · caselaw · US
General
William H. Waite, Respondent, v. Nancy Harriet Simons et al., Defendants, Thos. W. Kiley, Purchaser, Appellant
121 N.Y. 712·New York Court of Appeals·1890·NY
All concur.
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
William H. Waite, Respondent, v. Nancy Harriet Simons et al., Defendants, Thos. W. Kiley, Purchaser, Appellant.
(Argued June 17, 1890;
decided June 24, 1890.)
Appeal from order of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, made December 28, 1889, which affirmed an order of Special Term requiring the purchaser to complete his purchase of certain premises upon sale under a judgment of partition and sale herein.
Joseph A. Jaekson, Jr., for appellant.
Gharries 55 Luscomb for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Agree to affirm on opinion below.
All concur.
Order affirmed.