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.
Olive Arms, Respondent, v. Wm. D. Arms, as Executor, etc., Appellant, 1889 — 113 N.Y. 646 · caselaw · US
General
Olive Arms, Respondent, v. Wm. D. Arms, as Executor, etc., Appellant
113 N.Y. 646·New York Court of Appeals·1889·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
Olive Arms, Respondent, v. Wm. D. Arms, as Executor, etc., Appellant.
(Argued March 22, 1889;
decided April 16, 1889.)
Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the fourth judicial department, entered upon an order made January 10, 1888, which affirmed a judgment in favor of plaintiff, entered upon a verdict.
This action was upon a promissory note. The only question of importance presented here was as to whether the trial court should have submitted to the jury to decide upon the genuineness of the note sued upon, which said court declined to do. The court here held that the evidence did not require such a submission.
Watson M. Rogers for appellant.
Levi H. Brown for respondent.
[MAJORITY — Peckham, J.,]
Peckham, J.,
reads for affirmance.
All concur.
Judgment affirmed.