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 L. Hamilton et al., Respondents, v. James J. Coogan et al., Appellants, 1896 — 148 N.Y. 753 · caselaw · US
General
John L. Hamilton et al., Respondents, v. James J. Coogan et al., Appellants
148 N.Y. 753·New York Court of Appeals·1896·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 L. Hamilton et al., Respondents, v. James J. Coogan et al., Appellants.
Reported below, 7 Misc. Rep. 677.
(Argued January 31, 1896;
decided February 18, 1896.)
Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Court of dommon Pleas for the city and county of New York, entered upon an order made April 2, 1894, which affirmed a judgment in favor of plaintiffs entered upon a decision of the court on trial at Special Term.
Isaac II. Maynard for appellants.
Abner G. Thomas for respondents.
[MAJORITY]
Judgment affirmed, with costs, on opinion below.
All concur.