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.
Jacob Henning, as Administrator, etc., Respondent, v. Daniel W. Caldwell, as Receiver, etc., Appellant, 1893 — 137 N.Y. 553 · caselaw · US
General
Jacob Henning, as Administrator, etc., Respondent, v. Daniel W. Caldwell, as Receiver, etc., Appellant
137 N.Y. 553·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
Jacob Henning, as Administrator, etc., Respondent, v. Daniel W. Caldwell, as Receiver, etc., Appellant.
(Argued Januar 17, 1893;
decided February 7, 1893.)
Appeal from'udgment of the General Term of the Supréme Court in the fift judicial department, entered upon an order made March 29, 892, which affirmed a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict and affirmed an order denying a motion for a new trial.
John G. Millburn for appellant.
C. M. Bushnell for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Agree to affirm on opinion of General Term.
All concur.
Judgment affirmed.