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.
Hayden and Havens Company, Respondent, v. The New York Central and Hudson River Railroad Company, Appellant, 1888 — 108 N.Y. 626 · caselaw · US
General
Hayden and Havens Company, Respondent, v. The New York Central and Hudson River Railroad Company, Appellant
108 N.Y. 626·New York Court of Appeals·1888·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
Hayden and Havens Company, Respondent, v. The New York Central and Hudson River Railroad Company, Appellant.
(Argued December 16. 1887;
decided January 17, 1888.)
Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the fifth judicial department, entered upon an order made October 24, 1885, which affirmed a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon the report of a referee.
Edviojrd Ha/rris for appellant.
William Nathaniel Cogswell for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Agree to affirm; no opinion.
AH concur.
Judgment affirmed.