Legal Opinion

Meehan v. Dobson

New York Supreme Court

Decided July 3, 1911PublishedCited by 1 opinion

Action by one Meehan against one Dobson. Complaint dismissed.

1Opinion of the CourtGreenbaum, J.

[1] Where, as here, the defendants’ right to possession of the premises in question is based upon a tax lease executed by the city of New York, a recovery by the plaintiffs must rest upon the strength of their own title, and not upon the weakness of that of the defendants. Deering v. Reilly, 167 N. Y. 184, 190, 60 N. E. 447. To my mind there are two serious defects in the proofs submitted in behalf of the plaintiffs: First assuming that John T. McGowan died intestate, seised of the fee, the property would descend “to the brothers and sisters both of the father and mother of the intestate and…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Mills v. . HussonNew York Court of Appeals · 1893
  2. Deering v. . ReillyNew York Court of Appeals · 1901
  3. Kip v. . HirshNew York Court of Appeals · 1886
  4. Parrott v. DyerSupreme Court of Georgia · 1898
  5. Van Rensselaer v. PoucherNew York Supreme Court · 1847

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Ramapo Manufacturing Co. v. MapesAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1913

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

Powered by the Exa API