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.
Harriett Nugent, an Infant, by Harriett Nugent, her Guardian ad Litem, Respondent, v. Metropolitan Street Railway Company, Appellant, 1900 — 161 N.Y. 632 · caselaw · US
General
Harriett Nugent, an Infant, by Harriett Nugent, her Guardian ad Litem, Respondent, v. Metropolitan Street Railway Company, Appellant
161 N.Y. 632·New York Court of Appeals·1900·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
Harriett Nugent, an Infant, by Harriett Nugent, her Guardian ad Litem, Respondent, v. Metropolitan Street Railway Company, Appellant.
Nugent v. Metropolitan Street By. Go., 17 App. Div. 583, appeal dismissed.
(Argued December 4, 1899;
decided January 9, 1900.)
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered October 19,1897, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict, and an order denying a motion for a new trial.
Henry Melville, Charles F. Brown and Henry A. Robinson for appellant.
Andrew F. Murray and Arthur C. Palmer for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Appeal dismissed, upon the ground that the judgment has been set aside by the court below, without costs; no opinion.
All concur, except Parker, Oh. J.,' not sitting.