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.
Abraham Lindo et al., Appellants, v. Matthew T. Murray, as Executor of Matthew Murray, Deceased, Respondent, 1898 — 157 N.Y. 697 · caselaw · US
General
Abraham Lindo et al., Appellants, v. Matthew T. Murray, as Executor of Matthew Murray, Deceased, Respondent
157 N.Y. 697·New York Court of Appeals·1898·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
Abraham Lindo et al., Appellants, v. Matthew T. Murray, as Executor of Matthew Murray, Deceased, Respondent.
Lindo v. Murray, 91 Hun, 835, affirmed.
(Argued October 25, 1898;
decided November 22, 1898.)
Appeal from a judgment of the late General Term of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered January 14, 1896, upon an order affirming a judgment in favor of defendant entered upon a decision of the court dismissing the complaint on trial at Special Term.
Samuel Greeiibaum, for appellants.
John II. Bogan for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Judgment and order affirmed, with costs, upon the ground that the judgment construing the will is conclusive upon the parties; no opinion.
All concur, except Parker, Ch. J., not sitting.