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.
Maximilian Toch, Individually, etc., Respondent, v. Lucas Toch et al., Individually, etc., Impleaded, etc., Appellants, 1895 — 146 N.Y. 366 · caselaw · US
General
Maximilian Toch, Individually, etc., Respondent, v. Lucas Toch et al., Individually, etc., Impleaded, etc., Appellants
146 N.Y. 366·New York Court of Appeals·1895·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
Maximilian Toch, Individually, etc., Respondent, v. Lucas Toch et al., Individually, etc., Impleaded, etc., Appellants.
(Argued April 10, 1895;
decided April 30, 1895.)
Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered upon an order made November 16, 1894, which affirmed those portions appealed from of a judgment in favor of defendants entered upon a decision of the court on trial at Special Term.
Edward C. Stone and Treadwell Cleveland for appellants.
Louis Wertheimer and M. L. Townsend for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Agree to affirm; no opinion.
All concur.
Judgment affirmed.