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.
The People of the State of New York v. The North River Bank; In the Matter of George Manley et al., Appellants, v. Francis Higgins, Receiver, etc., Respondent, 1892 — 133 N.Y. 691 · caselaw · US
General
The People of the State of New York v. The North River Bank; In the Matter of George Manley et al., Appellants, v. Francis Higgins, Receiver, etc., Respondent
133 N.Y. 691·New York Court of Appeals·1892·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
The People of the State of New York v. The North River Bank. In the Matter of George Manley et al., Appellants, v. Francis Higgins, Receiver, etc., Respondent.
(Argued June 2, 1892;
decided June 17, 1892.)
Appeal from order of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, made October 16,1891, which reversed an order of Special Term, directing Francis Higgins, as receiver, to pay a dividend on the the claim of the appellant, as a depositor in the North River Bank.
Nelson S. Spencer for appellants.
Peter A. Hendrick for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Agree to affirm on prevailing opinion below.
All concur, except Gray, J., not voting.
Order affirmed.