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.
Frederick K. Keller, Respondent, v. The Metropolitan Elevated Railway Company, Appellant, 1892 — 129 N.Y. 667 · caselaw · US
General
Frederick K. Keller, Respondent, v. The Metropolitan Elevated Railway Company, Appellant
129 N.Y. 667·New York Court of Appeals·1892·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
Frederick K. Keller, Respondent, v. The Metropolitan Elevated Railway Company, Appellant.
(Submitted December 16, 1891;
decided January 20, 1892.)
Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Superior Court of the city of New York, entered upon an order made May 12, 1891, which affirmed a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a decision of the court on trial at Special Term.
Julien T. Davies and- Brainard Tolles for appellant.
Edwin M. Felt for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Agree to reverse and grant new trial on authority of Roberts v. N. Y. E. R. R. Co. (128 N. Y. 455).