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
Titus B. Eldridge, Respondent, v. The New York and Brighton Beach Railway Company, Appellant
82 N.Y. 631·New York Court of Appeals·1880·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
Titus B. Eldridge, Respondent, v. The New York and Brighton Beach Railway Company, Appellant.
(Argued November 9, 1880 ;
decided November 16, 1880.)
This was an appeal from an order of General Term, affirming an order of reference. It was decided on authority of Welsh v. Darraugh (52 N. T. 590).
John Sidney Davenport for appellant.
Titus B. Eldridge, respondent in person.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam]
Per Curiam
opinion for dismissal of appeal.
All concur.
Appeal dismissed.