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.
Frederick Correll et al., Appellants, v. William Lauterbach, Respondent, 1899 — 159 N.Y. 553 · caselaw · US
General
Frederick Correll et al., Appellants, v. William Lauterbach, Respondent
159 N.Y. 553·New York Court of Appeals·1899·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
Frederick Correll et al., Appellants, v. William Lauterbach, Respondent.
Correll v. Lauterbach, 12 App. Div. 531, affirmed.
(Argued May 8, 1899;
decided June 6, 1899.)
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered December 24,1896, affirming a judgment in favor of defendant entered upon a decision of the court on trial at Special Term.
David D. Ogden and Abram 1. ETkus for appellants.
Ferdinand R. Mimrath, George Hoadl/y, Abraham L. Jacobs and Samuel F. Jacobs for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Judgment affirmed, with costs, on opinion below.
All concur