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.
Anna M. Arnold, Appellant, v. Norfolk and New Brunswick Hosiery Company, Respondent, 1892 — 135 N.Y. 638 · caselaw · US
General
Anna M. Arnold, Appellant, v. Norfolk and New Brunswick Hosiery Company, Respondent
135 N.Y. 638·New York Court of Appeals·1892·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
Anna M. Arnold, Appellant, v. Norfolk and New Brunswick Hosiery Company, Respondent.
(Argued October 3, 1892;
decided October 18, 1892.)
Appeal from order of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, made August 18, 1892, which affirmed on certain conditions an order of Special Term vacating a judgment against the defendant and permitting it to serve an answer.
Frcmk F. Blackwell for appellant.
Walter D. Edmonds for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Agree to dismiss appeal; no opinion.
All concur.
Appeal dismissed.