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.
The Trustees of the Sustentation Fund of the Reformed Episcopal Church, Respondents, v. Richard Mullowney et al., Defendants. Harry Mintz, Appellant, 1900 — 164 N.Y. 578 · caselaw · US
General
The Trustees of the Sustentation Fund of the Reformed Episcopal Church, Respondents, v. Richard Mullowney et al., Defendants. Harry Mintz, Appellant
164 N.Y. 578·New York Court of Appeals·1900·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
The Trustees of the Sustentation Fund of the Reformed Episcopal Church, Respondents, v. Richard Mullowney et al., Defendants. Harry Mintz, Appellant.
Trustees v. Mullownet/, 50 App. Div. 465, affirmed.
(Argued October 2, 1900;
decided October 16, 1900.)
Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, entered May 1, 1900, modifying and affirming, as modified, an order of Special Term denying the motion of a purchaser at a foreclosure sale to be relieved from his bid and to direct the referee to Tefund the deposit paid thereon.
A motion to dismiss the appeal herein on the grounds that the relief sought was within the discretion of the court and the order of the Appellate Division final, and that the matter was a “ proceeding in the action,” and, therefore, not appeal-.able, was submitted prior to the argument of the appeal and denied, without costs.
John Mulhollcmd for appellant.
T. V. W. Anthony for respondents.
[MAJORITY]
Order affirmed, with costs, and the time for appellant to accept the privilege granted by the Appellate Division extended for twenty days after entry of order hereon ; no opinion.
Concur: Parker, Ch. J., O’Brien, Bartlett, • Haight, Martin, Yann and Landon, JJ.