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.
Theresia Binzen, Respondent, v. Simon Epstein et al., Appellants, 1902 — 172 N.Y. 596 · caselaw · US
General
Theresia Binzen, Respondent, v. Simon Epstein et al., Appellants
172 N.Y. 596·New York Court of Appeals·1902·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
Theresia Binzen, Respondent, v. Simon Epstein et al., Appellants.
Binzen v. Epstein, 58 App. Div. 304, affirmed.
(Argued June 24, 1902;
decided October 7, 1902.)
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered April 1, 1901, upon an order reversing a judgment in favor of defendants, entered upon a decision of the court on trial at Special Term and directing judgment in favor of plaintiff.
II. H. Snedeker for appellants.
Charles F. Brown and Frank Schaeffler for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.
Concur: Parker, Oh. J., O’Brien, Bartlett, Martin, Yann, Cullen and Werner, JJ.