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.
Torts · MBE-tested
William Stanton, Appellant, v. International Railway Company, Respondent
188 N.Y. 591·New York Court of Appeals·1907·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
William Stanton, Appellant, v. International Railway Company, Respondent.
(Argued April 4, 1907;
decided April 23, 1907.)
Stanton v. International Railway Co., 109 App. Div. 910, affirmed.
Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the fourth judicial department, entered November 21, 1905, 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 in an action to recover for personal injuries alleged to have been received through defendant’s negligence.
Philip A. Laing for appellant.
Charles B. Sears for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Order affirmed and judgment absolute ordered against appellant on the stipulation, with costs in all courts; no opinion.
Concur: Cullen, Ch. J., O’Brien, Edward T. Bartlett, Haight, Yann and Chase, JJ. Not sitting: Hiscóck, J.