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.
Roza Herzog, Appellant, v. The New York Elevated Railroad Company et al., Respondents, 1897 — 151 N.Y. 665 · caselaw · US
General
Roza Herzog, Appellant, v. The New York Elevated Railroad Company et al., Respondents
151 N.Y. 665·New York Court of Appeals·1897·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
Roza Herzog, Appellant, v. The New York Elevated Railroad Company et al., Respondents.
Herzog v. N. 7. El. R. R. Oo., 76 Hun, 486, affirmed.
(Argued January 21, 1897;
decided February 9, 1897.)
Appeal from a judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered March 30, 1894, which affirmed a judgment in favor of defendants entered upon a decision of the court dismissing the complaint on trial at Special Term.
W. H. O'Dwyer for appellant.
Brainard Tolles and Julien T. Davies for respondents.
[MAJORITY]
Judgment affirmed, with costs, on opinion below.
All concur, except Martin and Vann, JJ., not voting.