Howell v. Mills
New York Court of Appeals
Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court, in the second judicial department, affirming a judgment of the court, Special Term. (Reported below, 7 Lans., 193.) This was an action for partition.
Read the full summary
Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court, in the second judicial department, affirming a judgment of the court, Special Term. (Reported below, 7 Lans., 193.) This was an action for partition. The complaint alleged, in substance, that William Hurtin died on the 4th day of ¡November, 1858, seized of the premises in question, having previously made his last will and testament, dated June 21, 1854, which was admitted to probate by the surrogate of Orange county, ¡NT. Y., June 8, 1859, as a will of real and personal estate. The premises in question were devised by William…
1Opinion of the Court
Church, Ch. J.
This is an action for partition of real estate. The trial was at Special Term before a single judge. There are no findings of law or fact, and no exception reviewa*229ble in this court. The exceptions, filed five years after the judgment, to the “judgment ” and “ decree,” present no question for review. (Code, §§ 267, 268 ; 3 Keyes, 434; 29 K. Y., 616 ; 38 id., 305 ; 13 id., 341.)
The only question which can be considered, and this is urged on behalf of the defendants, is that the court had no jurisdiction to entertain these proceedings. This is predicated upon the ground that the…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Horton v. . McCoyNew York Court of Appeals · 1871
- Blakeley v. . CalderNew York Court of Appeals · 1857
- Douglass v. DayNew York Court of Appeals · 1867
3Cited by2 opinions
- In re of Proving the Last Will & Testament of PurdyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1899
- Stout v. Valle Crucis, Shawneehaw & Elk Park Turnpike Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1910