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.
Frank Place et al., Respondents, v. Miles E. Burlingame et al., Appellants, 1896 — 149 N.Y. 617 · caselaw · US
General
Frank Place et al., Respondents, v. Miles E. Burlingame et al., Appellants
149 N.Y. 617·New York Court of Appeals·1896·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
Frank Place et al., Respondents, v. Miles E. Burlingame et al., Appellants.
Place v. Burlingame, 75 Hun, 432, affirmed.
(Argued June 5, 1896;
decided June 19, 1896.)
Appeal from order of the General .Term of the Supreme Court in the fourth judicial department, made February 6, 1894, which reversed a judgment in favor of defendants entered upon a decision of the court directing a non-suit on trial at Circuit, and granted a new trial.
Eugene Burlingame for appellants.
B. T. Wright for respondents.
[MAJORITY]
Order affirmed and judgment absolute ordered for plaintiffs on the stipulation, with costs, on opinion below.
All concur, except Martin, J., not sitting.