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.
Mary Sweeny et al., as Administrators of Dennis Sweeny, Sr., Deceased, Respondents, v. L. Laflin Kellogg, Appellant, 1906 — 185 N.Y. 547 · caselaw · US
Contracts · MBE-tested
Mary Sweeny et al., as Administrators of Dennis Sweeny, Sr., Deceased, Respondents, v. L. Laflin Kellogg, Appellant
185 N.Y. 547·New York Court of Appeals·1906·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
Mary Sweeny et al., as Administrators of Dennis Sweeny, Sr., Deceased, Respondents, v. L. Laflin Kellogg, Appellant.
Sweeny v. Kellogg, 103 App. Div. 609, affirmed.
(Argued April 19, 1906;
decided May 8, 1906.)
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered April 13, 1905, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiffs entered upon a verdict and an order denying a motion for a new trial in an action for the specific performance of a contract under which defendant received a certain sum of money as trustee to be distributed by him upon the settlement of a dispute.
Abram J. Rose, L. Laflin Kellogg and Alfred G. Petté for appellant.
Frederic J. Swift for respondents.
[MAJORITY]
Judgment affirmed, with costs ; no opinion.
Concur: Cullen, Ch. J., Gray, Edward T. Bartlett, Haight, Vann, Willard Bartlett and Chase, JJ.