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.
Orpha Van Houten, Respondent, v. Isaac E. Pye, Appellant, 1896 — 151 N.Y. 644 · caselaw · US
General
Orpha Van Houten, Respondent, v. Isaac E. Pye, Appellant
151 N.Y. 644·New York Court of Appeals·1896·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
Orpha Van Houten, Respondent, v. Isaac E. Pye, Appellant.
Reported below, 91 Hun, 640.
(Submitted December 14, 1896;
decided December 22, 1896.)
Motion to dismiss an appeal taken after the dismissal of a previous appeal for failure to file and serve return.
Frank Comesky for motion.
[MAJORITY]
Motion granted, on default.