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.
John Oelerich, an Infant, Respondent, v. The New York Condensed Milk Company, Appellant, 1891 — 127 N.Y. 680 · caselaw · US
General
John Oelerich, an Infant, Respondent, v. The New York Condensed Milk Company, Appellant
127 N.Y. 680·New York Court of Appeals·1891·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
John Oelerich, an Infant, Respondent, v. The New York Condensed Milk Company, Appellant.
(Argued June 15, 1891;
decided June 25, 1891.)
Appeal from judgment of the G-eneral Term of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, entered upon an order made July 3, 1889, which affirmed a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict and affirmed an order denying a motion for a new trial.
William W. Wiles, Jr., for appellant.
M. L. Towns for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Agree to affirm ; no opinion.
All concur.
Judgment affirmed.