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.
Mark M. Nicholls, Respondent, v. American Steel and Wire Company, Appellant, 1908 — 191 N.Y. 554 · caselaw · US
Contracts · MBE-tested
Mark M. Nicholls, Respondent, v. American Steel and Wire Company, Appellant
191 N.Y. 554·New York Court of Appeals·1908·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
Mark M. Nicholls, Respondent, v. American Steel and Wire Company, Appellant.
Wicholls v. American Steel & Wire Oo., 117 App. Div. 21, affirmed.
(Argued March 13, 1908;
decided March 31, 1908.)
Appeal from a judgment entered February 11, 1907, upon an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, reversing a judgment in favor of defendant entered upon a dismissal of the complaint by the court at a Trial Term after a special verdict had been rendered in favor of plaintiff and directing judgment upon the verdict in an action to recover for an alleged breach of contract of sale.
Raynal C. Bolling and Charles Mac Veagh for appellant.
George T. Hogg and Antonio Knauth for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.
Concur: Cullen, Ch. J., Haight, Vann, Werner, Willard Bartlett and Chase, JJ. Not sitting: Hiscook, J.