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.
New York Security and Trust Company, Appellant, v. Ernest Lipman et al., Respondents, 1893 — 139 N.Y. 657 · caselaw · US
Securities
New York Security and Trust Company, Appellant, v. Ernest Lipman et al., Respondents
139 N.Y. 657·New York Court of Appeals·1893·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
New York Security and Trust Company, Appellant, v. Ernest Lipman et al., Respondents.
(Argued October 16, 1893;
decided October 27, 1893.)
Appeal from order of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, made July 5, 1893, and modified July 21, 1893, which reversed an order of Special Term granting an application by plaintiff for an injunction.
Howard A. Taylor for appellant.
Antonio Knauth for respondents.
[MAJORITY]
Agree to affirm; no opinion.
All concur.
Order affirmed.