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 A. Donohue, Respondent, v. American Bridge Company of New York, Appellant, 1906 — 186 N.Y. 609 · caselaw · US
General
Thomas A. Donohue, Respondent, v. American Bridge Company of New York, Appellant
186 N.Y. 609·New York Court of Appeals·1906·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 A. Donohue, Respondent, v. American Bridge Company of New York, Appellant.
Donohue v. American Bridge Co., 111 App. Div. 908, affirmed.
(Argued December 3, 1906;
decided December 18, 1906.)
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the fourth judicial department, entered January 6, 1906, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict and an order denying a motion for a new trial in an action to recover for personal injuries alleged to have been received through defendant’s neglegence.
Charles E. Snyder for appellant.
William S. Jenney for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Judgment affirmed, with costs ; no opinion.
Concur: Cullen, Ch. J., O’Brien, Edward T. Bartlett, Haight, Vann, Willard Bartlett and Chase, JJ.