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.
In the Matter of the New York Central and Hudson River Railroad Company, Respondent, to acquire lands of The Charlotte Iron Works, Appellant, 1890 — 121 N.Y. 665 · caselaw · US
General
In the Matter of the New York Central and Hudson River Railroad Company, Respondent, to acquire lands of The Charlotte Iron Works, Appellant
121 N.Y. 665·New York Court of Appeals·1890·NY
All concur.
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
In the Matter of the New York Central and Hudson River Railroad Company, Respondent, to acquire lands of The Charlotte Iron Works, Appellant.
(Argued April 14, 1890;
decided April 29, 1890.)
Appeal from order of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the fifth judicial department, made December 29, 1889, which reversed an order of Special Term granting the respondent’s application for the appointment of commissioners herein.
Theodore Bacon for appellant.
Edward Harris for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Agree to affirm on opinion below.*
All concur.
Order affirmed.