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 Ross, Administrator, etc., Respondent, v. Andrew Roberts, impleaded, etc., Appellant, et al., Respondents, 1876 — 63 N.Y. 652 · caselaw · US
General
William Ross, Administrator, etc., Respondent, v. Andrew Roberts, impleaded, etc., Appellant, et al., Respondents
63 N.Y. 652·New York Court of Appeals·1876·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 Ross, Administrator, etc., Respondent, v. Andrew Roberts, impleaded, etc., Appellant, et al., Respondents.
(Submitted December 6, 1875;
decided January 18, 1876.)
Reported below, 2 Hnn, 90.
B. W. & C. M. Woodward for the appellant.
Speir & Baker for the respondents.
[MAJORITY]
Agree to affirm. No opinion.
All concur; Miller, J., not sitting.
Judgment affirmed.