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 Leather Manufacturers' National Bank, Appellant, v. Laura P. Halsted et al., Respondents, 1891 — 124 N.Y. 674 · caselaw · US
General
The Leather Manufacturers' National Bank, Appellant, v. Laura P. Halsted et al., Respondents
124 N.Y. 674·New York Court of Appeals·1891·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 Leather Manufacturers’ National Bank, Appellant, v. Laura P. Halsted et al., Respondents.
(Argued March 12, 1891;
decided April 14, 1891.)
Appeal, under section 1336 of the Code of Civil Procedure, from final judgment in favor of defendants, entered upon an order of Special Term, made August 1, 1887, after an affirmance by the General Term of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, of an interlocutory judgment, entered upon an order of Special Term sustaining a demurrer to the complaint.
Charles E. Hughes for appellant.
Wm. Pierrejpont Williams for respondents.
[MAJORITY]
Agree to affirm on authority of Knower v. Central National Bank (ante, p. 552).
All concur.
Judgment affirmed.