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 Claim of the County of Oneida, Appellant, v. Myron N. Bartholomew, a Lunatic, Respondent, 1897 — 151 N.Y. 655 · caselaw · US
General
In the Matter of the Claim of the County of Oneida, Appellant, v. Myron N. Bartholomew, a Lunatic, Respondent
151 N.Y. 655·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 Claim of the County of Oneida, Appellant, v. Myron N. Bartholomew, a Lunatic, Respondent.
Oounty of Oneida v. Bartholomew, 83 Hun, 80, affirmed.
(Argued December 21, 1896;
decided January 19, 1897.)
Appeal from an order of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the fourth judicial department, entered December 17, 1894, which modified and, as modified, affirmed an order of Special Term, adjudging that the appellant had a valid claim against the estate of a lunatic.
Howard C. Wiggins for appellant.
D. C. Burke for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Order affirmed, with costs, on opinion below.
All concur, except O’Bbien, J., absent, and Mabtin, J., not sitting.