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.
Maurice Nelligan, Respondent, v. James Nelligan, Appellant, 1899 — 160 N.Y. 690 · caselaw · US
General
Maurice Nelligan, Respondent, v. James Nelligan, Appellant
160 N.Y. 690·New York Court of Appeals·1899·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
Maurice Nelligan, Respondent, v. James Nelligan, Appellant.
(Submitted October 9, 1899;
decided October 17, 1899.)
Reported below, 30 App. Div. 621.
Motion to substitute David Nelligan, as executor of Maurice Nelligan, deceased, as respondent herein.
Also motion to place on the preferred calendar the appeal herein from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the third judicial department, entered May 7, 1898, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon the report of a referee.
The motion was made upon the grounds : 1. That the pendency of the appeal prevents a final settlement of an estate. 2. That the executor of Maurice Nelligan, deceased, is sole party plaintiff and respondent herein.
Edward N. Jackson, for motion.
[MAJORITY]
Bo one opposed.
Motion for substitution granted and motion to advance denied, without costs.