Case Name: James M. Tator, App'lt, v. Charlotte M. Tator, Impleaded, Resp't
Court: New York Supreme Court, General Term
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1890-02-15
Citations: 29 N.Y. St. Rep. 886
Docket Number: 
Parties: James M. Tator, App’lt, v. Charlotte M. Tator, Impleaded, Resp’t.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York State Reporter
Volume: 29
Pages: 886–886

Head Matter:
James M. Tator, App’lt, v. Charlotte M. Tator, Impleaded, Resp’t.
(Supreme Court, General Term, Fourth Department,
Filed February 15, 1890.)
Partition.
In an action for partition the defense was that the impleaded defendant was sole owner and the court so found on sufficient evidence. Held, that the complaint was properly dismissed on the merits.
Appeal from a judgment entered in Onondaga county June 4, 1888, upon a decision of the court at special term.
Iioyt & Beach, for app’lt; W. B. & F. B. Hughitt, for resp’t.

Opinion:
Martin, J.
This action was for the partition of a farm situated in the town of Lysander, Onondaga county, N. Y. The defense was that the defendant, Charlotte M. Tator, was, at the commencement of the action, the sole owner of the premises in question. On the trial the court so found. The evidence was sufficient to justify such finding. The court properly dismissed the plaintiff's complaint on the merits.
None of the exceptions in the case disclose any error that requires a reversal of the judgment.
Judgment affirmed, with costs.
Hardin, P. J., and Merwin, J., concur.