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.
Octavius O. Cottle et al., Appellants, v. The County of Erie et al., Respondents, 1903 — 173 N.Y. 591 · caselaw · US
Civil Procedure · MBE-tested
Octavius O. Cottle et al., Appellants, v. The County of Erie et al., Respondents
173 N.Y. 591·New York Court of Appeals·1903·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
Octavius O. Cottle et al., Appellants, v. The County of Erie et al., Respondents.
Cottle v. County of Brie, 57 App, Div. 443, affirmed.
(Argued December 10, 1902;
decided January 6, 1903.)
Appeal from an order of the'Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the fourth judicial department, entered March 20, 1901, reversing a judgment in favor of plaintiffs entered upon a decision of the court on trial at Special Term and granting a new trial.
Edmund P. Cottle for appellants.
Percy S. Lansdowne, Harry N. Kraft, Charles Diebold, Jr., and John W. Fisher for respondents.
[MAJORITY]
Order affirmed and judgment absolute ordered against plaintiffs on the stipulation, with costs in all courts, upon the ground that there was a question of fact in relation to occupancy and an error of law in relation to the method adopted by the plaintiff to prove occupancy ; no opinion.
Concur : Parker, Ch. J., Gray, Bartlett, Haight, Vann and Cullen, JJ. Dissenting: O’Brien, J.