The respondents demurred to the complaint on the ground that it did not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. The demurrer was overruled at special term, and, from the order and interlocutory judgment entered overruling it,, the present respondents appealed to the general term of this court. There the demurrer was sustained, and the order and interlocutory judgment overruling the demurrer were reversed, and final judgment directed to be entered dismissing the complaint, with costs. The opinion of the general term sustaining the demurrer, which is to be found in the case, (14 N. Y. Supp. 665.) is controlling,- and, as the questions now presented were therein fully discussed and passed upon, nothing remains but to affirm the judgment, with costs and disbursements.
Mellen, Appellant, v. Mellen et al., Respondents.
(Supreme Court, General Term, First Department.
July 7, 1892.)
Appeal from circuit court, New York county.
. Action by Sarah E. Mellen against William 0. Banning, sole surviving executor of the last will and testament of Abner Mellen, deceased, Helen I. Banning, wife of William 0. Banning, Maria L. Kendall, Abner M. Wilcox, and Winnifred Wilcox, his wife, and Gordon McKay Mellen, Stanley and Evelyn Mellen, minor children of Ebner Mellen, Jr., deceased, and of the plaintiff, to obtain a construction of decedent’s will, and to restrain the execution of powers of sale therein contained. From a trial judgment of general term dismissing the complaint, (14 N. Y. Supp. 665,) plaintiff appeals.
Affirmed.
For reports of other litigation involving this estate, see 9 N. Y. Supp. 929; 16 N. Y. Supp. 191, 887; 17 N. Y. Supp. 866; 18 N. Y. Supp. 515, 937,mem.
Argued before Van Brunt, P. J., and O’Brien and Patterson, JJ.
Henry Daily, Jr., for appellant. Alfred T. Ackert, for respondents.
Case Details
19 N.Y.S. 1001
References
Nothing yet... Still searching!
Nothing yet... Still searching!