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.
John Langford, Respondent, v. William Broadhead et al., Appellants, 1893 — 138 N.Y. 608 · caselaw · US
General
John Langford, Respondent, v. William Broadhead et al., Appellants
138 N.Y. 608·New York Court of Appeals·1893·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
John Langford, Respondent, v. William Broadhead et al., Appellants.
(Argued March 31, 1893;
decided April 11, 1893.)
Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the fifth judicial department, entered upon an order made January 22, 1892, which modified, and affirmed as modified, a judgment in favor of plaintiff, entered upon the report of a referee. .
O. P. Lockwood for appellants.
A. Hazeltme for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Agree to affirm on opinion below.
All concur.
Judgment affirmed.