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.
William S. Bartlemes, as Administrator of the Estate of Charles M. English, Deceased, Respondent, v. Edward F. Lathrop et al., Appellants, 1905 — 183 N.Y. 508 · caselaw · US
General
William S. Bartlemes, as Administrator of the Estate of Charles M. English, Deceased, Respondent, v. Edward F. Lathrop et al., Appellants
183 N.Y. 508·New York Court of Appeals·1905·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
William S. Bartlemes, as Administrator of the Estate of Charles M. English, Deceased, Respondent, v. Edward F. Lathrop et al., Appellants.
(Argued October 12, 1905;
decided October 27, 1905.)
Bartlemes v. Lathrop, 100 App. Div. 512, affirmed.
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division.of the Supreme Court in the fourth judicial department, entered January 20, 1905, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict and an order denying a motion for a new trial.
Clinton B. Gibbs for appellants.
Thomas A. Sullivan and Frederick G. Bagley for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.
Concur : Cullen, Ch. J., Gray, Bartlett, Haight, Yann and Werner,'JJ. Absent: O’Brien, J.