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.
Administrative
Augusta Gerlach, Administratrix, etc., Respondent, v. John H. Edelmeyer et al., Appellants
88 N.Y. 645·New York Court of Appeals·1882·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
Augusta Gerlach, Administratrix, etc., Respondent, v. John H. Edelmeyer et al., Appellants.
(Argued January 27, 1882;
decided February 7, 1882.)
Hugh Beamy for appellant.
Nathaniel O. Moak for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Agree to affirm; no opinion.
All concur, except Rapallo, J., absent, and Finch and Tract,
JJ., not voting.
Judgment affirmed.