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.
Darius G. Crosby, Respondent, v. The Workingmen's Co-operative Association of the United Insurance League of New York, Appellant, 1896 — 151 N.Y. 634 · caselaw · US
General
Darius G. Crosby, Respondent, v. The Workingmen's Co-operative Association of the United Insurance League of New York, Appellant
151 N.Y. 634·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
Darius G. Crosby, Respondent, v. The Workingmen’s Co-operative Association of the United Insurance League of New York, Appellant.
Reported below, 6 App. Div. 440.
(Argued November 30, 1896;
decided December 8, 1896.)
Motion to dismiss an appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, rendered at the June term, 1896, which affirmed a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a decision of the court on trial at Special Term. The motion was made upon the ground that the Appellate Division has unanimously decided that there wras evidence supporting or tending to sustain the findings of fact.
Fettretch, Silkman & Seybel for motion.
William B. Donihee opposed.
[MAJORITY]
Motion denied, with ten dollars costs.