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.
David Miller, Respondent, v. Benjamin Wright et al., Appellants, 1891 — 129 N.Y. 639 · caselaw · US
General
David Miller, Respondent, v. Benjamin Wright et al., Appellants
129 N.Y. 639·New York Court of Appeals·1891·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
David Miller, Respondent, v. Benjamin Wright et al., Appellants.
(Argued November 30, 1891;
decided December 15, 1891.)
Appeal from order of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, made May 11, 1891, which granted a motion to dismiss an appeal from a judgment in partition entered upon the report of a referee.
Norton Chase for appellants.
Samuel Keeler and F. P. Bellamy for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Agree to affirm ; no opinion.
All concur.
Order affirmed.