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.
Burdette B. Brown et al., Respondents, v. Charles Dow et al., Appellants, 1896 — 150 N.Y. 574 · caselaw · US
General
Burdette B. Brown et al., Respondents, v. Charles Dow et al., Appellants
150 N.Y. 574·New York Court of Appeals·1896·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
Burdette B. Brown et al., Respondents, v. Charles Dow et al., Appellants.
(Argued October 8, 1896;
decided October 27, 1896.)
Brown v. Brown, 79 Hun, 44, affirmed.
Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the fifth judicial departmént, entered July 13, 1894, which affirmed a judgment in favor of plaintiffs entered upon the report of a referee.
William Id. Henderson for appellants.
Clarence A. Farnxtm for respondents.
[MAJORITY]
Judgment affirmed on opinion helow, with costs.
All concur, except Haight, J., not sitting.