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.
Florence M. de Meli, Respondent, v. Henry A. de Meli, Appellant, 1882 — 90 N.Y. 654 · caselaw · US
Administrative
Florence M. de Meli, Respondent, v. Henry A. de Meli, Appellant
90 N.Y. 654·New York Court of Appeals·1882·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
Florence M. de Meli, Respondent, v. Henry A. de Meli, Appellant.
(Argued October 10, 1882;
decided October 27, 1882.)
Herbert B. Tv/rner for appellant.
John E. Pa/rsons for respondent.
[MAJORITY — Miller, J.,]
Miller, J.,
reads for affirmance. Andrews, Oh. J., Dan-forth and Tracy, JJ., concur on the ground that under the statute in question (Code §§ 438, 439, 1763) a, prima, facie case was made to authorize the order for the publication of the summons. Finch, J., concurs in result; Earl, J., dissents; Rapadlo, J., absent.
Order affirmed.