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
George L. Smith, Respondent, v. Owego Bridge Company, Appellant
161 N.Y. 617·New York Court of Appeals·1899·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
George L. Smith, Respondent, v. Owego Bridge Company, Appellant.
Smith v. Owego Bridge Go., 42 App. Div. 624, appeal dismissed.
(Argued November 20, 1899;
decided November 28, 1899.)
Motion to dismiss an appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the fourth judicial department, entered June 19, 1899, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon the report of a referee.
The motion was made upon the grounds that the questions involved are wholly questions of fact; that the decision of the Appellate Division was unanimous, and that the exceptions are frivolous.
W. I. Van Allen for motion.
Oscar B. Glezen opposed.
[MAJORITY]
Motion granted and appeal dismissed, with costs.