Merges v. . Ringler
New York Court of Appeals
Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered December 2, 1898, affirming an order of Special Term denying a motion by a purchaser to be relieved from his bid and purchase under decrees in an action of partition. Also, motion to dismiss the appeal from the order, upon the grounds that the appeal is frivolous and vexatious, and that the Court of Appeals has no jurisdiction to entertain it.
1Opinion of the Court
Fvrst. 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, Oh. J., joining in the decision because…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Smith v. . SecorNew York Court of Appeals · 1898
- Holme v. . StewartNew York Court of Appeals · 1898
3Cited by13 opinions
- Stock v. MannNew York Court of Appeals · 1930
- Ungrich v. ShaffAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1907
- Parish v. . ParishNew York Court of Appeals · 1903
- State Bank v. WilchinskyNew York Supreme Court · 1909
- Conlon v. . KellyNew York Court of Appeals · 1910
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.