Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
The People ex rel. Charles Kruse, Respondent, v. Charles H. Woodman et al., Appellants, 1889 — 115 N.Y. 644 · caselaw · US
General
The People ex rel. Charles Kruse, Respondent, v. Charles H. Woodman et al., Appellants
115 N.Y. 644·New York Court of Appeals·1889·NY
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
The People ex rel. Charles Kruse, Respondent, v. Charles H. Woodman et al., Appellants.
(Argued June 4, 1889;
decided June 18, 1889.)
Appeals from two orders of the General Term of the Court of Common Pleas for the city and county of New York, made June 13, 1888, which affirmed two orders of the Special Term, one denying the defendant’s motion to quash and set aside an alternative writ of mandamus, and the other framing an issue to be submitted to a jury.
Edward Browne for appellant.
Eugene L. Bushe for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Agree to dismiss appeals; no opinion.
All concur.
Appeals dismissed.