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 C. Chapman, Respondent, v. Josephine E. Ogden et al., Appellants; Caroline C. Chapman, Respondent, v. John R. Ogden, Jr., Appellant, 1901 — 165 N.Y. 642 · caselaw · US
General
Caroline C. Chapman, Respondent, v. Josephine E. Ogden et al., Appellants; Caroline C. Chapman, Respondent, v. John R. Ogden, Jr., Appellant
165 N.Y. 642·New York Court of Appeals·1901·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 C. Chapman, Respondent, v. Josephine E. Ogden et al., Appellants. Caroline C. Chapman, Respondent, v. John R. Ogden, Jr., Appellant.
Ohapman v. Ogden, 37 App. Div. 355, affirmed.
(Argued December 7, 1900;
decided January 22, 1901.)
Appeals from judgments of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered February 27, 1899, affirming judgments in favor of plaintiff entered upon verdicts directed by the court.
Charles J. Hardy and William L. Snyder for appellants.
George M. Bayne and Westmoreland D. Davis for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Judgments affirmed, with one bill of costs to plaintiffs against defendants, on opinion below.
Concur: Parker, Ch. J., Cray, Bartlett, Martin, Vann, Cullen and Werner, JJ.