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.
Thomas J. Briggs, Respondent, v. Francis J. Kennett et al. Appellants, 1896 — 149 N.Y. 577 · caselaw · US
General
Thomas J. Briggs, Respondent, v. Francis J. Kennett et al. Appellants
149 N.Y. 577·New York Court of Appeals·1896·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
Thomas J. Briggs, Respondent, v. Francis J. Kennett et al. Appellants.
Briggs v. Kennett, 8 Misc. Rep. 264, affirmed.
(Argued April 8, 1896;
decided April 28, 1896.)
Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Court of Common Pleas for the city and county of New York, entered upon an order made May 7, 1894, which affirmed a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon the report of a referee.
Wheeler H. Peckham, and Rufus W. Peckham,, Jr., for appellants.
Frederick Seymour and Frederic R. Kellogg for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Judgment affirmed, with costs, on opinions below.
All concur.