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.
Charles W. Eastwood et al., Respondents, v. James McNulty et al., Appellants, 1872 — 48 N.Y. 668 · caselaw · US
General
Charles W. Eastwood et al., Respondents, v. James McNulty et al., Appellants
48 N.Y. 668·New York Commission of Appeals·1872·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
Charles W. Eastwood et al., Respondents, v. James McNulty et al., Appellants.
(Argued September 28, 1871;
decided January term, 1872.)
Action for accounting between partners. The only questions presented were as to the construction of the articles of co-partnership.
Devoid MoAdam for the appellants.
8. T. Freemcm for the respondents.
[MAJORITY]
Hunt and Leonabd, CO., read for affirmance.
All concur. Judgment affirmed, with costs.