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.
The United States Leather Company, Respondent, v. Newton Aldrich et al., Appellants, 1906 — 186 N.Y. 558 · caselaw · US
General
The United States Leather Company, Respondent, v. Newton Aldrich et al., Appellants
186 N.Y. 558·New York Court of Appeals·1906·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
The United States Leather Company, Respondent, v. Newton Aldrich et al., Appellants.
United States Leather Co. v. Aldrich, 75 App. Div. 616, affirmed.
(Argued October 12, 1906;
decided October 26, 1906.)
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the third judicial department, entered October 3, 1902, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a decision of the court on trial at Special Term in an action to recover damages occasioned to plaintiff through the creation hy defendant of an artificial flood and the floating of logs thereby against plaintiff’s dam.
Vasco P. Abbott for appellants.
Earl Bancroft for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.
Concur: Cullen, Ch. J., Edward T. Bartlett, Haight, Yann and Hiscook, JJ. Absent: Gray, J. Not sitting; Chase, J.