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.
Robert Willets et al., Executors, etc., Respondents, v. Sarah A. Willets et al., Appellants, 1886 — 103 N.Y. 650 · caselaw · US
Administrative
Robert Willets et al., Executors, etc., Respondents, v. Sarah A. Willets et al., Appellants
103 N.Y. 650·New York Court of Appeals·1886·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
Robert Willets et al., Executors, etc., Respondents, v. Sarah A. Willets et al., Appellants.
(Argued June 22,1886 ;
decided October 26, 1886.)
George H. Forster, for appellants.
Wilson M. Powell and William M. Hoes, for respondents.
[MAJORITY]
Agree to reverse judgment of General Term, and to affirm judgment of Special Term on opinion of Andrews, J., in court below.
All concur, except Rapadlo, J., dissenting, and Miller, J., not voting.
Judgment accordingly.