Legal Opinion

Joos v. Fey

New York City Court

Decided March 26, 1890PublishedCited by 1 opinion

Appeal from trial term. Action for partition of real estate, brought by Ursula Joos against Christian Fey and Louise, his wife. Plaintiff appeals from a judgment dismissing his complaint.

1Opinion of the CourtClement, C. J.

Prior to and since March 18,1882, the defendants, Christian Fey and Louise Fey, were and have been husband and wife; and on that day certain real property located in this city was conveyed to them by deed, and the habendum clause reads as follows: “To have and to hold the above granted, bargained, and described premises, with the appurtenances, unto the said parties of the second part, their heirs and assigns, to their own proper use, benefit and behoof, forever, as joint tenants, and not as tenants in common.” On July 25, 1887, Louise Fey, the wife, executed a quitclaim deed to the plaintiff…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Bertles v. . NunanNew York Court of Appeals · 1883
  2. Pray v. StebbinsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1886
  3. Stevens v. StevensNew York Supreme Court · 1819
  4. Barber v. HarrisNew York Supreme Court · 1836
  5. Shaw v. HearseyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1809

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Menton v. MelvinMassachusetts District Court, Appellate Division · 1952

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API