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
Richard Foran, Appellant, v. The New York Central and Hudson River Railroad Company, Respondent
147 N.Y. 718·New York Court of Appeals·1895·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
Richard Foran, Appellant, v. The New York Central and Hudson River Railroad Company, Respondent.
Mem. of decision below, 72 Hun, 639.
(Argued October 25, 1895;
decided November 26, 1895.)
Appeal from so much of an order of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the fifth judicial department, made May 9, 1893, as reversed a judgment in favor of plaintiff, entered upon a verdict.
Moses Shire for appellant.
Charles A. Pooley for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Order affirmed and judgment absolute ordered for defendant, with costs, on opinion at General Term.
All concur, except Finch and Haight, JJ., not sitting.