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.
Emma M. Haskins, as Administratrix, etc., Appellant, v. The New York Central and Hudson River Railroad Company, Respondent, 1895 — 145 N.Y. 604 · caselaw · US
General
Emma M. Haskins, as Administratrix, etc., Appellant, v. The New York Central and Hudson River Railroad Company, Respondent
145 N.Y. 604·New York Court of Appeals·1895·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
Emma M. Haskins, as Administratrix, etc., Appellant, v. The New York Central and Hudson River Railroad Company, Respondent.
(Argued January 25, 1895;
decided March 5, 1895.)
Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the fifth judicial department, entered upon an order made January 20, 1894, which affirmed a judgment in favor of defendant entered upon an order dismissing the complaint on trial at Circuit, and also affirmed an order denying a motion for a new trial.
John Gillette for appellant.
J. W. Dunwell for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Agree to affirm; no opinion.
All concur, except Bartlett, J., dissenting, and Finch and Haight, JJ., not sitting.
Judgment affirmed.