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.
Marion Lehman, Respondent, v. Great Eastern Casualty and Indemnity Company of New York, Appellant, 1899 — 158 N.Y. 689 · caselaw · US
General
Marion Lehman, Respondent, v. Great Eastern Casualty and Indemnity Company of New York, Appellant
158 N.Y. 689·New York Court of Appeals·1899·NY
All concur.
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
Marion Lehman, Respondent, v. Great Eastern Casualty and Indemnity Company of New York, Appellant.
(Argued January 24, 1899;
decided February 28, 1899.)
Appeal from a judgment and order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the fourth judicial department, entered in June, 1896, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict directed by the court, and an order denying a motion for a hew trial.
Lehman v. G. E. Cas. & Ind. Co., 7 App. Div. 424, affirmed.
S. W. Rosendale and William Strauss for appellant.
Moses W. Shire and Edward L. Jellinck for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Judgment and order affirmed, with costs, on opinion below.
All concur.