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.
The City of New York, Respondent, v. Preble Tucker, Appellant, 1905 — 182 N.Y. 535 · caselaw · US
Corporations
The City of New York, Respondent, v. Preble Tucker, Appellant
182 N.Y. 535·New York Court of Appeals·1905·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
The City of New York, Respondent, v. Preble Tucker, Appellant.
(Argued June 7, 1905;
decided October 3, 1905.)
City of New York v. Tucker, 91 App. Div. 214, affirmed.
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered March 2, 1901, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict directed by the court.
Lawson Purdy for appellant.
John J. Delany, Corporation Counsel (Theodore Connoly and George S. Coleman of counsel), for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Judgmént affirmed, with costs; no opinion.
Concur: Cullen, Ch. J., Gray, O’Brien, Bartlett, Haight, Yann and Werner, JJ.