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.
Bertha Schafhaus, Respondent, v. The City of New York, Appellant, 1899 — 159 N.Y. 557 · caselaw · US
Corporations
Bertha Schafhaus, Respondent, v. The City of New York, Appellant
159 N.Y. 557·New York Court of Appeals·1899·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
Bertha Schafhaus, Respondent, v. The City of New York, Appellant.
Schafhaus v. City of New York, 38 App. Div. 475, affirmed.
(Submitted May 10, 1899;
decided June 6, 1899.)
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered April 28,1898, upon a submission of controversy under section 1279, Code of Civil Procedure.
John Whalen, Corporation Counsel {William J. Ca/rr of counsel), for appellant.
Arthur Hurst for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Judgment affirmed, with costs, on opinion below.
All concur, except Haight and Vann, JJ., not voting.