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.
Civil Procedure · MBE-tested
William P. Clark et al., Appellants and Respondents, v. Erie Railroad Company, Respondent and Appellant
175 N.Y. 491·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
William P. Clark et al., Appellants and Respondents, v. Erie Railroad Company, Respondent and Appellant.
Clark v. Erie R. R. Co., 70 App. Div. 622, affirmed.
(Argued May 15, 1903;
decided June 2, 1903.)
Cross-appeals from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the fourth judicial department, entered March 24, 1902, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiffs entered upon a verdict directed by the court.
Edward C. Randall for plaintiffs, appellants and respondents.
Adelbert Moot for defendant, respondent and appellant.
[MAJORITY]
Judgment affirmed, without costs; no opinion.
Concur: O’Brien, Bartlett, Haight, Martin, Yann, Cullen and Werner, JJ.