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.
General
Leila O. Henriques and Mary A. Mason, Appellants, v. The Miriam Osborn Memorial Home Association, Respondent, Impleaded with Others; Same, Appellants, v. Yale University, Respondent, Impleaded with Others
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
Leila O. Henriques and Mary A. Mason, Appellants, v. The Miriam Osborn Memorial Home Association, Respondent, Impleaded with Others. Same, Appellants, v. Yale University, Respondent, Impleaded with Others.
Henriques v. Yale University, 28 App. Div. 854, appeal dismissed.
Henriques v. M. 0. M. H. Assn., 28 App. Div. 625, appeal dismissed.
(Argued October 3, 1898;
decided October 11, 1898.)
Motions to dismiss appeals from final judgments of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, rendered at the April Term, 1898, affirming judgments' of the Special Term sustaining demurrers to replies to affirmative defenses contained in the answers, on the ground that the appeals are frivolous and vexatious, the complaint having been previously dismissed as to the defendant trustee. (See Henriques v. Sterling, 156 N. Y.- 684.)
Joseph H. Choate and Thomas G. Shea/rmcm for motion.
McCurdy & Yard opposed.
[MAJORITY]
Appeals dismissed, with costs.