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 Manhattan Savings Institution, Respondent, v. Katherine Norton and Henry Allen, purchaser, Appellant, 1882 — 89 N.Y. 607 · caselaw · US
Administrative
The Manhattan Savings Institution, Respondent, v. Katherine Norton and Henry Allen, purchaser, Appellant
89 N.Y. 607·New York Court of Appeals·1882·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 Manhattan Savings Institution, Respondent, v. Katherine Norton and Henry Allen, purchaser, Appellant.
(Argued April 25, 1882;
decided May 5, 1882.)
Edwa/rd S. Sapallo for appellant.
Samuel Hand for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Agree to affirm on opinion of court below.
All concur, except Miller and Tracy, JJ., absent.
Order affirmed.