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
Charles H. Williams, Respondent, v. The Village of Port Chester, Appellant
183 N.Y. 566·New York Court of Appeals·1906·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
Charles H. Williams, Respondent, v. The Village of Port Chester, Appellant.
(Submitted January 8, 1906;
decided January 16, 1906.)
[MAJORITY]
Motion to reinstate appeal. , (See 183 N. Y. 550.)
Motion denied upon the ground that a question of fact is involved. (See Walden v. City of Jamestown, 178 N. Y. 213.)