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.
Mary B. Pringle, as Executrix of James E. Pringle, Deceased, Respondent, v. The Long Island Railroad Company, Appellant; In the Matter of the Application of James S. Biddell, as Administrator with the Will Annexed of James E. Pringle, 1898 — 157 N.Y. 672 · caselaw · US
General
Mary B. Pringle, as Executrix of James E. Pringle, Deceased, Respondent, v. The Long Island Railroad Company, Appellant; In the Matter of the Application of James S. Biddell, as Administrator with the Will Annexed of James E. Pringle
157 N.Y. 672·New York Court of Appeals·1898·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
Mary B. Pringle, as Executrix of James E. Pringle, Deceased, Respondent, v. The Long Island Railroad Company, Appellant. In the Matter of the Application of James S. Biddell, as Administrator with the Will Annexed of James E. Pringle.
Reported below, 27 App. Div. 144.
(Argued October 3, 1898;
decided October 11, 1898.)
Motion to dismiss an appeal by certification from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered April 14, 1898, reversing an order of Special Term denying a motion to substitute James S. Biddell as administrator with the will annexed of the estate of James E. Pringle, deceased, as plaintiff herein and granting the motion.
This motion was made upon the ground that the appeal was not taken or perfected within the time prescribed by the Code of Civil Procedure.
James E. Davis for motion.
William J. Kelly opposed.
[MAJORITY]
.Motion denied, without costs.