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.
Oil Well Supply Company, Respondent, v. Phœnix Iron Works Company, Appellant, 1907 — 189 N.Y. 530 · caselaw · US
Contracts · MBE-tested
Oil Well Supply Company, Respondent, v. Phœnix Iron Works Company, Appellant
189 N.Y. 530·New York Court of Appeals·1907·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
Oil Well Supply Company, Respondent, v. Phœnix Iron Works Company, Appellant.
Oil Well Supply Oo. v. Phcenix Iron Works Oo., Ill App. Div. 809, affirmed.
(Argued June 12, 1907;
decided October 1, 1907.)
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the fourth judicial department, entered June 29, 1906, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon the report of a referee in an action to recover on an alleged contract for labor and materials furnished.
George H. Burt for appellant.
H. L. Howe for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.
Concur: Cullen, Ch. J., Edward T. Bartlett, Haight, Yann, Werner and Hiscock, JJ. Absent: Gray, J.