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 Estate of Jacob H. Deyo, 1886 — 102 N.Y. 724 · caselaw · US
General
In the Matter of the Estate of Jacob H. Deyo
102 N.Y. 724·New York Court of Appeals·1886·NY
All concur.
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 Estate of Jacob H. Deyo.
(Submitted June 1, 1886;
decided June 8, 1886.)
This was an appeal from an order of General Term affirming an order of a surrogate made in 1884, denying a motion to vacate and set aside a surrogate’s decree made in 1814, upon final accounting of executors, on the ground of mistake. The court here held that the evidence justified a finding that there was no mistake, also that it was. in the discretion of the court below to deny the motion on the ground of loches.'
A. T. Clearwater for appellant.
Lewis PLasbrouok for respondent.
[MAJORITY — Rugeb, Oh. J.,]
Rugeb, Oh. J.,
reads mem. for affirmance.
All concur.
Judgment affirmed.