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 Foster, Appellant, v. The City of Buffalo, Respondent, 1889 — 116 N.Y. 656 · caselaw · US
General
Mary Foster, Appellant, v. The City of Buffalo, Respondent
116 N.Y. 656·New York Court of Appeals·1889·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 Foster, Appellant, v. The City of Buffalo, Respondent.
(Submited October 8, 1889;
decided October 22, 1889.)
Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the fifth judicial department, entered upon an order' made October 22,1886, which affirmed a judgment in favor of defendant, entered upon a decision of the court on trial without a jury.
Edmund J. Plumley for appellant.
Frank C. Laughlin for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Agree to affirm; no opinion.
All concur, except Bbadley and Haight, JJ., not sitting.
Judgment affirmed.