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
Edward Wagner, by his Guardian ad Litem, Louis Ehrhardt, Respondent, v. Metropolitan Street Railway Company, Appellant
176 N.Y. 610·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
Edward Wagner, by his Guardian ad Litem, Louis Ehrhardt, Respondent, v. Metropolitan Street Railway Company, Appellant.
Wagner v. Metropolitan Street Mg. (Jo., 79 App. Div. 591, affirmed.
(Argued November 12, 1903;
decided December 1, 1903.)
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered February 14, 1903, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict and an order denying a motion for a new trial.
Cha/rles F. Brown, Arthur Ofner and Henry A. Robinson for appellant.
Henry A. Powell for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Judgment affirmed, with costs, on opinion below.
Concur: Pabkeb, Ch. J., O’Bbien, Babtlett, Haight, Yann, Cullen and Webneb, JJ.