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 Application of Mary Walker for Relief from Orders to make Payments to the Superintendent of the Poor of Oneida County, 1892 — 129 N.Y. 666 · caselaw · US
General
In the Matter of the Application of Mary Walker for Relief from Orders to make Payments to the Superintendent of the Poor of Oneida County
129 N.Y. 666·New York Court of Appeals·1892·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 Application of Mary Walker for Relief from Orders to make Payments to the Superintendent of the Poor of Oneida County.
(Argued December 14, 1891;
decided January 20, 1892.)
Appeal from order of the General Term of the Supreme Oourt in the fourth judicial department, made July Y, 1891, which affirmed an order of the Oneida County Court of Sessions denyihg the petitioner’s application to vacate certain orders requiring her to make certain payments to the superintendent of the poor of said county for the support of Sarah Walker.
S. M. Lindsley for appellant.
W. B. Bliss for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Agree to dismiss appeal on ground that it was discretionary with the Court of Sessions to vacate or modify the order; no opinion.
All concur.
Appeal dismissed.