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.
Edward H. Roos, Respondent, v. Samuel E. Laird, Appellant, 1898 — 155 N.Y. 683 · caselaw · US
General
Edward H. Roos, Respondent, v. Samuel E. Laird, Appellant
155 N.Y. 683·New York Court of Appeals·1898·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
Edward H. Roos, Respondent, v. Samuel E. Laird, Appellant.
Boos v. Laird, 13 Hi sc. Rep. 780, affirmed.
(Argued March 15, 1898;
decided April 19, 1898.)
Appeal from a judgment of the General Term of the late Superior Court of Buffalo, entered July 30, 1895, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon the report of a referee.
Eugene M. Ba/rilett for appellant.
Fred D. Gorey for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Judgment affirmed, with costs and ten per cent damages for delay, under section 3251 of the Code; no opinion.
All concur.