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 Bahr, Respondent, v. John J. Clarke, Appellant, 1907 — 189 N.Y. 536 · caselaw · US
Property · MBE-tested
Mary Bahr, Respondent, v. John J. Clarke, Appellant
189 N.Y. 536·New York Court of Appeals·1907·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 Bahr, Respondent, v. John J. Clarke, Appellant.
Bahr v. Clarke, 113 App. Div. 890, affirmed.
(Argued May 3, 1907;
decided October 8, 1907.)
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the fourth judicial department, entered May 18, 1906, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a decision of the court on trial at Special Term in an action for the reformation of a deed and to recover the value of the difference between the amount of land actually conveyed by defendant and the amount called for in the deed executed by him.
Theodore F. Ilanooeh for appellant.
Fdwarcl Devine for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.
Concur; Cullen, Oh. J., Gbay, O’Beien, Yann,Werneb, Willabd Babtlett and Chase, JJ.