Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)

EMMA MERGES, Plaintiff, v. MARY RINGLER et al., Defendants. JACOB F. OPPERMAN, by J. ASPINWALL HODGE, JR., his Guardian ad Litem, Plaintiff and Respondent,

First. The order is reviewable, and the motion to dismiss the appeal is denied.

All concur (GRAY, J., upon the sole ground that since the cases of Holme v. Stewart [ 155 N.Y. 695], Smith v. Secor, and Kingsland v. Fuller [ 157 N.Y. 402 and 507], the question can no longer be deemed to be an open one, and that the court is committed to the view that such orders are final orders in special proceedings), except PARKER, Ch. J., MARTIN and VANN, JJ., dissenting.

Second. On the merits, the order is affirmed on the opinion below, with costs.

All concur (PARKER, Ch. J., joining in the decision because the court has determined the order to be appealable), except BARTLETT, MARTIN and VANN, JJ., not voting.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

MERGES v. RINGLER
(Mar 7, 1899)