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 L. Lefurgy, as Administratrix, etc., Respondent, v. James Stewart et al., Appellants
140 N.Y. 661·New York Court of Appeals·1893·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 L. Lefurgy, as Administratrix, etc., Respondent, v. James Stewart et al., Appellants.
(Submitted December 8, 1893;
decided December 22, 1893.)
Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, entered upon an order made May 25, 1893, which affirmed a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon the report of a referee.
Joseph F. Daly for appellants.
John Brooks Lernitt for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Agree to affirm, with costs and five per cent damages for delay; no opinion.
All concur.
Judgment affirmed.