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.
John D. Hicks et al., Respondents, v. Jesse Torrence Magoun, Appellant. Harry Johnson et al., Respondents, 1901 — 167 N.Y. 540 · caselaw · US
General
John D. Hicks et al., Respondents, v. Jesse Torrence Magoun, Appellant. Harry Johnson et al., Respondents
167 N.Y. 540·New York Court of Appeals·1901·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
John D. Hicks et al., Respondents, v. Jesse Torrence Magoun, Appellant. Harry Johnson et al., Respondents.
(Argued April 23, 1901;
decided May 7, 1901.)
Hicks v. Magoun, 38 App. Div. 573, affirmed.
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, entered March 16, 1899, affirming a judgment of Special Term entered upon the report of a referee in an action to foreclose a mechanic’s lien.
Henry A. Monfort and Eugene Fishel for appellant.
George M. Baker, for plaintiffs, respondents.
John De Witt Warner, Edward L. Frost, Timothy M. Griffing and Pierre M. Brown for defendants, respondents.
[MAJORITY]
Judgment affirmed, with costs ; no opinion.
Concur: Parker, Oh. J., O’Brien, Bartlett, Martin, Vann and Landon, JJ. Not sitting: Cullen, J.