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
Adolph Goldmark, Appellant, v. Magnolia Metal Company, Respondent
161 N.Y. 653·New York Court of Appeals·1900·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
Adolph Goldmark, Appellant, v. Magnolia Metal Company, Respondent.
Reported below, 44 App. Div. 35.
(Submitted January 22, 1900 ;
decided January 30, 1900.)
Motion to dismiss an appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered October 31, 1899, which affirmed a judgment in favor of defendant, entered upon a dismissal of the complaint at a Trial Term.
The motion was made on the grounds that the judgment was unanimously affirmed by the Appellate Division; that the Appellate Division has not certified that a question of law is involved which ought to be reviewed by the Court of Appeals, nor has the appeal been allowed by a judge of this court; that the action is one to recover compensation for services, and is not, as of right, appealable to this court.
Nichols c& Bacon for motion.
Constant (& Coghill opposed.
[MAJORITY]
Motion denied, with ten dollars costs.