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 Oswego City Savings Bank, Respondent, v. The Board of Education of Union Free School District, No. 2, Towns of Manheim and Oppenheim, Appellant
174 N.Y. 515·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
The Oswego City Savings Bank, Respondent, v. The Board of Education of Union Free School District, No. 2, Towns of Manheim and Oppenheim, Appellant.
Oswego City Savings Bank v. Board of Education, 70 App. Div. 538, affirmed.
(Argued February 25, 1903;
decided March 17, 1903.)
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the fourth judicial department, entered April 9, 1902, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a decision of the court at a Trial Term without a jury.
A. M. Mills and George W. Ward for appellant.
Elisha B. Powell for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.
Concur: Parker, Ch. J., O’Brien, Bartlett, Martin, Vann, Cullen and Werner, JJ.