Lenehan v. College of St. Francis Xavier
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Appeal by Samuel Bloch, the purchaser at a judicial sale, from an order of the Supreme Court, made at the New York Special Term and entered in the office of the clerk of the county of New York on the 2d day of February, 1900, directing him to complete his purchase.
1Opinion of the Court
Rumsey, J.:
This is an action of partition. J udgment was entered directing the sale of the premises, and upon that sale the appellant' Samuel Bloch bid the property in. He subsequently refused to perform his contract and this motion was made to compel him to do so.
In the title of the action there were named as parties defendant “ John Doe (the said name John Doe being fictitious, and being *536intended to designate the unknown heirs, if any, of Catharine Coy,, deceased, whose real names, if any, are unknown to plaintiff);. Richard Roe (the said name Richard Roe being fictitious, and being…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Goodwin v. CrooksAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1901
- Goodwin v. CrooksNew York Supreme Court · 1900
- Luby v. Washington Sterling Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1926
- Lenehan v. College of St. Francis XavierAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1900
- McQuillan v. McQuillanNew York Supreme Court · 1912