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 Roe, Appellant, v. Thomas E. Crimmins, Respondent, 1898 — 155 N.Y. 690 · caselaw · US
General
William Roe, Appellant, v. Thomas E. Crimmins, Respondent
155 N.Y. 690·New York Court of Appeals·1898·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 Roe, Appellant, v. Thomas E. Crimmins, Respondent.
Boe y. Orimmins, 10 Mise. Eep. 711, affirmed.
(Argued March 24, 1898;
decided April 19, 1898.)
Appeal, by permission, from an order of the General Term of the late Court of Common Pleas for the city and county of New York, entered January J, 1895, reversing a judgment of the General Term of the City Court of New York affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff, entered upon a verdict, and granting a new trial.
Edgar J. Kathan and Michael R. Qawdozo for appellant.
Thomas 8. Moore for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Order affirmed and judgment absolute ordered for defendant on the stipulation, with costs ; no opinion.
All concur.