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.
Sarah E. Bishop, Respondent, v. The Autographic Register Company of New York, Appellant, 1901 — 165 N.Y. 662 · caselaw · US
General
Sarah E. Bishop, Respondent, v. The Autographic Register Company of New York, Appellant
165 N.Y. 662·New York Court of Appeals·1901·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
Sarah E. Bishop, Respondent, v. The Autographic Register Company of New York, Appellant.
Bishop v. Autographic Register Co., 19 App. Div. 268, affirmed.
(Submitted December 31, 1900;
decided February 5, 1901.)
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered July 14, 1897, modifying and affirming as modified a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict, and affirming an order denying a motion for a new trial.
Walter C. Shoup and Appleton D. Palmer for appellant.
Isaac N. Miller for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.
Concur: Gray, O’Brien, Landon, Cullen and Werner, JJ. Not sitting: Parker, Ch. J. Absent: Haight, J.