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.
Magdalena Grafing et al., as Executrices of Diedrick Grafing, Deceased, Appellants, v. Catharine Heilmann, Respondent, 1897 — 153 N.Y. 673 · caselaw · US
General
Magdalena Grafing et al., as Executrices of Diedrick Grafing, Deceased, Appellants, v. Catharine Heilmann, Respondent
153 N.Y. 673·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
Magdalena Grafing et al., as Executrices of Diedrick Grafing, Deceased, Appellants, v. Catharine Heilmann, Respondent.
Grafing v. Heilmann, 1 App. Div. 260, affirmed.
(Argued June 11, 1897;
decided June 25, 1897.)
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, entered Eebruary 11, 1896, which affirmed a judgment in favor of defendant, entered upon a decision of the court on trial at Special Term.
Horace Secor, Jr., for appellants.
Edward . W. 8. Johnston for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Judgment affirmed, with costs, on opinion below, but without intending to determine what are the lights to this fund as between the several persons who are mentioned in the letter of August 14, 1893.
All concur, except Gray, J., absent.