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.
Clothilde Bodine et al., Respondents, v. Ronald K. Brown et al., Trustees, et al., Appellants, et al., Respondents, 1897 — 152 N.Y. 631 · caselaw · US
General
Clothilde Bodine et al., Respondents, v. Ronald K. Brown et al., Trustees, et al., Appellants, et al., Respondents
152 N.Y. 631·New York Court of Appeals·1897·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
Clothilde Bodine et al., Respondents, v. Ronald K. Brown et al., Trustees, et al., Appellants, et al., Respondents.
Reported below, 12 App. Div. 335.
(Argued March 1, 1897;
decided March 9, 1897.)
Motion to place on calendar as a preferred cause, under subdivision 6, section 791 of the Code of Civil Procedure, an appeal, by permission, from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered December 30, 1898, which affirmed an interlocutory judgment entered upon a decision of the court on trial at Special Term, in an action of partition.
George W. Van Slyck for motion.
[MAJORITY]
Motion granted.