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 United Glass Company, Appellant, v. Peter R. Sleight,. as Receiver of the Trotter Refrigerator Company,. Impleaded, Respondent, 1895 — 147 N.Y. 701 · caselaw · US
General
The United Glass Company, Appellant, v. Peter R. Sleight,. as Receiver of the Trotter Refrigerator Company,. Impleaded, Respondent
147 N.Y. 701·New York Court of Appeals·1895·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 United Glass Company, Appellant, v. Peter R. Sleight,. as Receiver of the Trotter Refrigerator Company,. Impleaded, Respondent.
Mem. of decision below, 86 Hun, 617.
(Argued October 7, 1895;
decided October 22, 1895.)
Appeal from order of the General Term of the Supreme. Court in the fifth judicial department, made March 26, 1895,. which affirmed an order of Special Term denying a motion to remove the receiver herein and for other and further-relief.
Charles 8. Kent for appellant.
Horace McGuire for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Appeal dismissed, with costs; no opinion.
All concur.