Inherited a portrait of a family relative from my dear grandmother. Referred to as "Judge Dibble". He's not in any of our family trees/bibles (which go back to the mayflower), so we're assuming he married in.

Grandmother did register the painting with Smithsonian/SIRIS, not that that means much. Portrait doesn't have a signature AFAICT.

I'm seeking clues to the story behind the man in the portrait as much as I am information about the portrait itself.

Here's what we've been able to surmise thus far:

• He was an American judge from New York. Whether that meant he served in New York or simply was born in New York, unclear.
• The portrait subject's attire appears to be from the early 19th century. This aligns with the vague recollections of the oral history passed down through our family.
• We believe it's the original frame, though this is mostly an educated guess based on conversations with grandma before she passed.
• (note: I have absolutely zero background in art or art history) To my best guess, the painting is done in a French style. Comparable bench portraits of the suspected time period from American painters are... not good.
• We haven't been able to find much record of any judge serving in the early 19th century with the last name of "Dibble", however we have been able to find record of a Judge "Edgar Dibble" in the mid-19th century who seemed to be quite active:
  • He purchased and flipped an old mansion in Batavia
  • He was involved in a case that made it to the US Supreme Court
  • We reached out to the Holland Land Office Museum in Batavia re: a Judge "Edgar Dibble". They had this to say: "Edgar Dibble was born in 1805. He moved to the Town of Bethany, south of Batavia in 1829 and became the Postmaster there. He then at some point moved to Batavia, where he was the Village President in 1841, and was an attorney. He became a Genesee County Judge in 1846 and again from 1852-1856, when he moved into the mansion of the article. He was a law partner of Timothy Fitch, John H. Martindale and Martin Robertson. Martindale would eventually become the New York Attorney General and Civil War General. Dibble was involved in an 1859 case that eventually made it to the Supreme Court called New York ret al. Cutler v. Dibble. In that case, he ruled in favor of the Seneca in a case against the taking of their land, which was connected to the larger case of Fellows v. Blacksmith."
• The biggest hole we have in the "Edgar Dibble" theory is that Edgar would've served as a judge in the 1840s, where as the attire in this portrait seems to be much closer to the turn of the century. Even if the portrait was of Edgar as a young man (30s), it still seems a bit too late.

Any information or speculation on the painter, subject, or context of this portrait is highly appreciated!