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.
William S. Macfarland, Respondent, v. Thomas H. Walter, Appellant, 1889 — 115 N.Y. 649 · caselaw · US
General
William S. Macfarland, Respondent, v. Thomas H. Walter, Appellant
115 N.Y. 649·New York Court of Appeals·1889·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
William S. Macfarland, Respondent, v. Thomas H. Walter, Appellant.
(Argued June 18, 1889;
decided June 25, 1889.)
Motion to dismiss appeal from order of the General Term, of the Superior Court of the city of New York, made May 29, 1889, which affirmed an order of Special Term granting a motion on the part of plaintiff for judgment on the ground of the frivolousness of a demurrer to plaintiff’s complaint. •
Frederick F. Anderson for motion.
H. F. Birdsall opposed.
[MAJORITY]
Agree to grant motion; no opinion.
All concur.
Appeal dismissed.