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.
Thomas White, Respondent, v. The City of Brooklyn, Appellant, 1893 — 139 N.Y. 651 · caselaw · US
General
Thomas White, Respondent, v. The City of Brooklyn, Appellant
139 N.Y. 651·New York Court of Appeals·1893·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
Thomas White, Respondent, v. The City of Brooklyn, Appellant.
(Argued October 11, 1893;
decided October 27, 1893.)
Appeal from judgment of tlie General Term of the City Court of Brooklyn, entered upon an order made July 27, 1892, which affirmed a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a decision of the court on trial at Special Term.
William F. Gilbert for appellant.
William E. Osborn for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Agree to affirm on opinion in White v. City of Brooklyn (122 N. Y. 53), with ten per cent damages, under section 3251 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
All concur.
Judgment affirmed.