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.
In the Matter of the Petition of William H. Janes, Appellant, to Revoke Probate of Will of Eckford Webb, Deceased; Jessie Belknap Ranken, Respondent, 1897 — 152 N.Y. 647 · caselaw · US
General
In the Matter of the Petition of William H. Janes, Appellant, to Revoke Probate of Will of Eckford Webb, Deceased; Jessie Belknap Ranken, Respondent
152 N.Y. 647·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
In the Matter of the Petition of William H. Janes, Appellant, to Revoke Probate of Will of Eckford Webb, Deceased; Jessie Belknap Ranken, Respondent.
Matter of Janes, 87 Hun, 57, affirmed.
(Argued March 12, 1897;
decided March 26, 1897.)
Appeal from a judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, entered May 20, 1895, which affirmed a decree of the Surrogate’s Court of Kings county dismissing proceedings to revoke the probate of a will.
Louis O. Van Doren for appellant.
James D. Bell and Abram H. Dailey for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.
All concur, except Martin, J., absent.