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.
Edward A. Milliman, Appellant, v. John Christgau, Respondent, 1888 — 110 N.Y. 620 · caselaw · US
General
Edward A. Milliman, Appellant, v. John Christgau, Respondent
110 N.Y. 620·New York Court of Appeals·1888·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
Edward A. Milliman, Appellant, v. John Christgau, Respondent.
(Argued May 3, 1888;
decided June 5, 1888.)
Appeal from order of the General Term of the Supreme •Court in the fifth judicial department, made October 24,1885, which reversed a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon the report of a referee, and ordered a new trial.
F. Brundage for appellant.
Jacob A. Driess for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Agree to affirm order and for judgment absolute, on ■stipulation.
All concur; no opinion.
Order affirmed and judgment accordingly.