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.
Caroline Salisbury, Administratrix, etc., Respondent, v. Burton G. Morss et al., Appellants, 1874 — 55 N.Y. 675 · caselaw · US
General
Caroline Salisbury, Administratrix, etc., Respondent, v. Burton G. Morss et al., Appellants
55 N.Y. 675·New York Court of Appeals·1874·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
Caroline Salisbury, Administratrix, etc., Respondent, v. Burton G. Morss et al., Appellants.
(Argued January 20, 1874;
decided January 27, 1874.)
F. It. Gilbert for the appellant.
James B. Olney for the respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Agree to affirm on opinion of Daniels, J., below, reported, 7 Lansing, 359.
Judgment affirmed.