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.
Stephen E. Calkins et al., Appellants, v. Daniel Vrooman, Respondent, 1882 — 90 N.Y. 675 · caselaw · US
General
Stephen E. Calkins et al., Appellants, v. Daniel Vrooman, Respondent
90 N.Y. 675·New York Court of Appeals·1882·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
Stephen E. Calkins et al., Appellants, v. Daniel Vrooman, Respondent.
(Argued November 21, 1882;
decided November 28, 1882.)
This was an appeal from an order of General Term reversing upon questions of fact a judgment entered upon the report of a referee. Only questions of fact were presented here.
FT. A. Galkins for appellant.
Sidney Orowell for respondent.
[MAJORITY — Earl, J.,]
Earl, J.,
reads for affirmance of order of General Term, and for judgment absolute dismissing the complaint.
All concur, except Tract, J., absent.
Order affirmed and judgment accordingly.