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.
Joseph Hamerschlag et al., Appellants, v. Oscar Duryea, Respondent, 1902 — 172 N.Y. 622 · caselaw · US
General
Joseph Hamerschlag et al., Appellants, v. Oscar Duryea, Respondent
172 N.Y. 622·New York Court of Appeals·1902·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
Joseph Hamerschlag et al., Appellants, v. Oscar Duryea, Respondent.
Hamershlag v. Duryea, 58 App. Div. 288, affirmed.
(Argued October 10, 1902;
decided October 28, 1902.)
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered March 30, 1901, affirming a judgment in favor of defendant ■entered upon a dismissal of the complaint by tile court on trial at Special Term.
Edward E. Sprague and William H. Stockwell for appellants.
Wilson M. Powell, John L. Gadwalader and Elbridge G. Duval for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Judgment affirmed, with costs ; no opinion.
Concur: Parker, Oh. J., O’Brien, Bartlett, Haight,' Cullen and Werner, JJ. Not voting: Vann, J.