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.
Frederick Mead, Respondent, v. The New York Elevated Railroad Company et al., Appellants, 1898 — 155 N.Y. 688 · caselaw · US
General
Frederick Mead, Respondent, v. The New York Elevated Railroad Company et al., Appellants
155 N.Y. 688·New York Court of Appeals·1898·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
Frederick Mead, Respondent, v. The New York Elevated Railroad Company et al., Appellants.
Mead v. W. T. Elevated B. B. Co., 13 Mise. Rep. 646, affirmed.
(Argued March 21, 1898;
decided April 19, 1898.)
Appeal from a judgment of the General Term of the late Superior Court of, the city of New York, entered May 10, 1895, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a decision of the court on trial at an Equity Term.
Julien T. Davies and J. Osgood Nichols for appellants.
Joseph H. Ghoate and William V. Rowe for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.
All concur.