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.
George C. Genet, Appellant, v. The City of Brooklyn, Respondent, 1889 — 114 N.Y. 618 · caselaw · US
General
George C. Genet, Appellant, v. The City of Brooklyn, Respondent
114 N.Y. 618·New York Court of Appeals·1889·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
George C. Genet, Appellant, v. The City of Brooklyn, Respondent.
(Argued March 18, 1889;
decided April 16, 1889.)
Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, entered upon an order made July 21,1886, which affirmed a judgment in favor of plaintiff, entered upon a decision of the court on trial at Special Term.
The case is reported on former appeals. (94 N. Y. 645; 99 id. 296.)
The court here state, in substance, that the questions sought to be raised by the appellant have been already decided in the former appeals, and that the findings and decision here are in accord with the principles there laid down.
George C. Genet, appellant, in person.
D. D. Whitney, Jr., for respondent.
[MAJORITY — Potter, J.,]
Potter, J.,
reads for affirmance.
All concur, Brown ; J., concurring in result.
Judgment affirmed.