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.
Frank A. Beyer, Appellant, v. Heny Sigel, Respondent, 1904 — 177 N.Y. 575 · caselaw · US
General
Frank A. Beyer, Appellant, v. Heny Sigel, Respondent
177 N.Y. 575·New York Court of Appeals·1904·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
Frank A. Beyer, Appellant, v. Heny Sigel, Respondent.
Beyer v. Sigel, 75 App. Div, 83, affirmed.
(Argued January 25, 1904;
decided February 9, 1904.)
Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the fourth judicial department, entered July 24, 1902, which affirmed an order of the Cattaraugus County Court setting aside a verdict in favor of plaintiff and granting a new trial.
George W. Qole for appellant.
J. H. Wa/ring for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Order affirmed, with costs; no opinion.
Concur: Parker, Ch. J., Cray, Bartlett, Haight, Vann and Werner, JJ.; Cullen J., votes for dismissal of appeal.