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.
John Reamer et al., Respondents, v. Philo J. Lockwood et al., Appellants, 1875 — 61 N.Y. 658 · caselaw · US
General
John Reamer et al., Respondents, v. Philo J. Lockwood et al., Appellants
61 N.Y. 658·New York Commission of Appeals·1875·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
John Reamer et al., Respondents, v. Philo J. Lockwood et al., Appellants.
(Submitted September 24, 1874;
decided January term, 1875.)
This case presented simply questions as to the reception , and rejection of evidence. The rulings below were held correct, under the peculiar circumstances of the case, or were sustained because the objections- and exceptions were insufficient.
E. Baldwin for the appellants.
S. R. Ten Eyck for the respondents.
[MAJORITY — Earl, C.,]
Earl, C.,
reads for affirmance.
All concur.
Judgment affirmed.