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.
Marco Lucco, Respondent, v. New York Central and Hudson River Railroad Company, Appellant, 1898 — 156 N.Y. 662 · caselaw · US
General
Marco Lucco, Respondent, v. New York Central and Hudson River Railroad Company, Appellant
156 N.Y. 662·New York Court of Appeals·1898·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
Marco Lucco, Respondent, v. New York Central and Hudson River Railroad Company, Appellant.
Lucco v. W. T. O. & H. R. R. R. Oo., 87 Hun, 613, affirmed.
(Argued April 28, 1898;
decided May 13, 1898.)
Appeal from a judgment of the late General Term of the Supreme Court in the fifth judicial department, entered July 6, 1895, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff, entered upon a verdict, and an order denying a motion for a new trial.
Albert H. Harris for appellant.
Norris Bull for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Judgment affirmed, with costs, on opinion below.
All concur, except Parker, Ch. J., and Gray, J., who dissent.