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.
Edwin W. Montgomery, Appellant, v. Buffalo Railway Company, Respondent, 1899 — 158 N.Y. 708 · caselaw · US
General
Edwin W. Montgomery, Appellant, v. Buffalo Railway Company, Respondent
158 N.Y. 708·New York Court of Appeals·1899·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
Edwin W. Montgomery, Appellant, v. Buffalo Railway Company, Respondent.
(Submitted February 27, 1899;
decided March 7, 1899.)
Reported below, 24 App. Div. 454.
Motion to amend return on appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the fourth judicial department, made December 18, 1897, reversing a judgment in favor of 'plaintiff, entered upon a verdict, and an order denying a motion for a new trial, and from the judgment entered thereon January 3, 1898, by inserting in the notice of appeal the words “ as amended by the Appellate Division on the 25th day of March, 1898,” and also a stipular tion for judgment absolute.
H. Filmare Brown for motion.
No one opposed.
[MAJORITY]
Motion granted, without costs.