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.
In the Matter of the Application of George H. Stonebridge, Jr., Receiver, etc., Respondent, v. John B. Alden, Appellant, 1891 — 128 N.Y. 618 · caselaw · US
General
In the Matter of the Application of George H. Stonebridge, Jr., Receiver, etc., Respondent, v. John B. Alden, Appellant
128 N.Y. 618·New York Court of Appeals·1891·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
In the Matter of the Application of George H. Stonebridge, Jr., Receiver, etc., Respondent, v. John B. Alden, Appellant.
(Submitted June 16, 1891;
decided June 25, 1891.)
Appeal from order of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, made March 20, 1891, which affirmed an order of Special Term directing the issuance of a warrant for the examination of the appellant and also affirmed an order of Special Term denying a motion to. vacate said warrant.
James B. Dill for appellant.
Charles E. Hughes for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Agree to affirm; no opinion.
All concur.
Order affirmed.