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.
The City of Cohoes, Appellant, v. James Morrison, Respondent, 1889 — 116 N.Y. 662 · caselaw · US
General
The City of Cohoes, Appellant, v. James Morrison, Respondent
116 N.Y. 662·New York Court of Appeals·1889·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
The City of Cohoes, Appellant, v. James Morrison, Respondent.
(Argued October 15, 1889;
decided November 26, 1889.)
Reported below, 42 Hun, 216.
Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme-Court in the third judicial department, entered upon an order made November 16, 1886, which affirmed a judgment in favor of defendant, entered upon an order dismissing the complaint on trial.
Matthew Hale for appellant.
Edgar L. Fursman for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Agree to-affirm; no opinion.
All concur, except Haight, J., not voting.
Judgment affirmed.