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
The Metropolitan Concert Company (Limited), Plaintiff, v. Howard A. Sperry et al., Appellants, et al., Respondents
125 N.Y. 750·New York Court of Appeals·1891·NY
All concur.
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 Metropolitan Concert Company (Limited), Plaintiff, v. Howard A. Sperry et al., Appellants, et al., Respondents.
(Argued January 26, 1891;
decided February 24, 1891.)
Appeal from order of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, made December 29, 1890, which affirmed an order of Special Term denying an application to compel the respondents, as sureties, to pay the costs of a judgment rendered against plaintiff.
Eemry Cooper for appellants.
Eugene Seligman for respondents.
[MAJORITY]
Agree to affirm; no opinion.
All concur.
Order affirmed.