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
Andrew J. Holcomb, Respondent, v. Charles W. Harris, as Executor of Edmund S. Harris, Deceased, Appellant
172 N.Y. 660·New York Court of Appeals·1902·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
Andrew J. Holcomb, Respondent, v. Charles W. Harris, as Executor of Edmund S. Harris, Deceased, Appellant.
Holcomb v. Harris, 41 App. Div. 617, appeal dismissed.
(Submitted December 1, 1902;
decided December 2, 1902.)
Motion to dismiss an appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the third judicial department, entered July 14, 1902, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict and an order denying a motion for a new trial.
The motion was made upon the ground that the judgment of the Appellate Division was unanimous; that said court had refused an application for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals, and that more than thirty days had elapsed after service of a copy of the order denying such application before the appellant applied to a judge of the Court of Appeals for leave to appeal.
James Lansing for motion.
John T. Norton opposed.
[MAJORITY]
Motion granted and appeal dismissed, with costs, and ten dollars costs of motion.