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.
Thomas Swords et al., Respondents, v. The Northern Light Oil Company, et al., Appellants, 1887 — 107 N.Y. 642 · caselaw · US
General
Thomas Swords et al., Respondents, v. The Northern Light Oil Company, et al., Appellants
107 N.Y. 642·New York Court of Appeals·1887·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
Thomas Swords et al., Respondents, v. The Northern Light Oil Company, et al., Appellants.
(Submitted October 18, 1887;
decided October 25, 1887.)
George A. Black for appellants.
Flamen B. Gaudier and Mitchell ' L. Frlanger for respondents.
[MAJORITY]
Agree to affirm, with leave to apply to the court for leave to answer.
All concur; no opinion.
Order affirmed.