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.
Catharine O'Donnell, Respondent, v. The New York and Harlem Railroad Company, Appellant, 1879 — 77 N.Y. 625 · caselaw · US
Administrative
Catharine O'Donnell, Respondent, v. The New York and Harlem Railroad Company, Appellant
77 N.Y. 625·New York Court of Appeals·1879·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
Catharine O’Donnell, Respondent, v. The New York and Harlem Railroad Company, Appellant.
(Argued May 22, 1879;
decided June 10, 1879.)
JEMott F. Shepard for appellant.
Seig Spingam for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Agree to affirm on opinion of the court below.
Church, Ch. J., Folger, Andrews and Danforth, JJ., concur. ' "
Rapallo, Miller and Earl, JJ., dissent.
Judgment affirmed.