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
Lafayette L. Long, Appellant, v. John Richmond, Respondent
175 N.Y. 495·New York Court of Appeals·1903·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
Lafayette L. Long, Appellant, v. John Richmond, Respondent.
Long v. Richmond, 68 App. Div. 466, affirmed.
(Argued May 19, 1903;
decided June 2, 1903.)
Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the fourth judicial department, entered January 13, 1902, which reversed a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict and an order denying a motion for a new trial and granted a new trial.
Herbert B. Butterfield for appellant.
Frank Brundage and Wheeler & Slee for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Order affirmed and judgment absolute ordered for defendant on the stipulation, with costs ; no opinion.
Concur: Parker, Ch. J., Gray, O’Brien, Haight and Werner, JJ. Dissenting : Martin and Cullen, JJ.