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.
Charles U. Wing, Respondent, v. Belnado De La Rionda et al., Appellants, 1891 — 126 N.Y. 680 · caselaw · US
General
Charles U. Wing, Respondent, v. Belnado De La Rionda et al., Appellants
126 N.Y. 680·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
Charles U. Wing, Respondent, v. Belnado De La Rionda et al., Appellants.
(Submitted April 27, 1891;
decided June 2, 1891.)
Appeal from order of the General Term of the City Court of Brooklyn, made March 26, 1891, which affirmed an order of Special Term directing payment of an extra allowance as part of the costs to be paid for a new trial in an action of ejectment under section 1525 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
Oliver J. Wells and Q. E. Waldo for appellants.
Charles IT. Otis and Ed/ward M. Shepard for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Agree to affirm; no opinion.
All concur.
Order affirmed.