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.
William F. Peck, a Taxpayer of the City of Rochester, Respondent, v. The City of Rochester et al., Impleaded, etc., Appellants, 1891 — 126 N.Y. 621 · caselaw · US
Tax
William F. Peck, a Taxpayer of the City of Rochester, Respondent, v. The City of Rochester et al., Impleaded, etc., Appellants
126 N.Y. 621·New York Court of Appeals·1891·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
William F. Peck, a Taxpayer of the City of Rochester, Respondent, v. The City of Rochester et al., Impleaded, etc., Appellants.
(Argued February 23, 1891;
decided March 10, 1891.)
Appeal from order of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the fifth judicial department, made January 7, 1890, which affirmed an order of Special Term, declaring the defendants’ case on appeal abandoned.
Ilenry J. Sullivan for appellants.
John IT Hopkins for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Agree to dismiss appeal; no opinion.
All concur.
Appeal dismissed.