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.
Samuel Wells, Respondent, v. The City of Brooklyn, Appellant, 1900 — 162 N.Y. 657 · caselaw · US
Corporations
Samuel Wells, Respondent, v. The City of Brooklyn, Appellant
162 N.Y. 657·New York Court of Appeals·1900·NY
Concur : Parker, Ch. J., Gray, Bartlett, Martin, Vann and Werner, JJ. Not sitting, Cullen, J.
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
Samuel Wells, Respondent, v. The City of Brooklyn, Appellant.
Wells v. City of Brooklyn, 21 App. Div. 626, affirmed.
(Argued March 23, 1900;
decided May 1, 1900.)
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, entered. October 28, 1897, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict directed by the court,
John, Whalen, Corporation Counsel (William J. Carr of counsel), for appellant.
Frederick E. Creme and James D. Bell for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.
Concur : Parker, Ch. J., Gray, Bartlett, Martin, Vann and Werner, JJ. Not sitting, Cullen, J.