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.
E. De Braekeleer & Co., Limited, Respondent, v. Henry Schwabeland et al., Substituted in Place and Stead of John J. Gorman, as Sheriff of the City and County of New York, Appellants, 1898 — 155 N.Y. 644 · caselaw · US
General
E. De Braekeleer & Co., Limited, Respondent, v. Henry Schwabeland et al., Substituted in Place and Stead of John J. Gorman, as Sheriff of the City and County of New York, Appellants
155 N.Y. 644·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
E. De Braekeleer & Co., Limited, Respondent, v. Henry Schwabeland et al., Substituted in Place and Stead of John J. Gorman, as Sheriff of the City and County of New York, Appellants.
Braeheleer v. Schwabeland, 86 Hun, 143, affirmed.
(Argued February 1, 1898;
decided March 1, 1898.)
Appea-l from a judgment of the late General Term of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered April 17, 1895, upon an order, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict and an order denying a motion for .a new trial.
George P. Hotalmg for appellants.
Daniel P. Hays for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Judgment and order affirmed, with costs, on opinion below.
All concur.