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
Herman Siefke, Respondent, v. Henry Siefke, Appellant
161 N.Y. 641·New York Court of Appeals·1900·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
Herman Siefke, Respondent, v. Henry Siefke, Appellant.
Reported below, 36 App. Div. 633.
(Submitted January 8, 1900;
decided January 16, 1900.)
Motion to substitute Henry Siefke, executor, etc., of Henry Siefke, deceased, as appellant, and to prefer an appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered January 10,1899, which affirmed a judgment in favor of plaintiff, entered upon a verdict.
The motion was made upon the ground that during the pendency of the appeal a party to the action has died, and the pendency of the appeal prevents the settlement of his estate.
George W. McAdam for motion.
No one opposed.
[MAJORITY]
Motion granted, without costs.