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.
General
Mary Reynolds, Appellant, v. The City National Bank of Watertown et al., Respondents
151 N.Y. 641·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
Mary Reynolds, Appellant, v. The City National Bank of Watertown et al., Respondents.
Beynolds v. Oiiy National Bank, 71 Hun, 386, affirmed.
(Argued December 4, 1896;
decided December 22, 1896.)
Appeal from a judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court' in the fourth judicial department, entered October 2, 1893, which affirmed a judgment in favor of defendants entered upon a decision of the court at Special Term dismissing the complaint.
Hannibal Smith for appellant.
John Lansing for respondents.
[MAJORITY]
Judgment affirmed, with costs, on opinions below.
All concur.