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.
W. P. Davis Machine Company, Plaintiff, v. Harry Robinson et al., Appellants; Arthur Warren, Respondent, 1907 — 189 N.Y. 498 · caselaw · US
General
W. P. Davis Machine Company, Plaintiff, v. Harry Robinson et al., Appellants; Arthur Warren, Respondent
189 N.Y. 498·New York Court of Appeals·1907·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
W. P. Davis Machine Company, Plaintiff, v. Harry Robinson et al., Appellants; Arthur Warren, Respondent.
(Not reported below.)
(Argued May 20, 1907;
decided June 4, 1907.)
Appeal, from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the fourth judicial department, entered September 26,1905, which affirmed an order of Special Term directing the respondent herein to deliver certain papers to the defendants in the above-entitled action upon payment by them of the amount of his lien as their former attorney.
George D. Forsyth for appellants.
Philebus Chamberlain for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Order affirmed, with costs; no opinion.
Concur: Cullen, Ch. J., O’Brien, Edward T. Bartlett, Haight, Vann and Chase, JJ. Not sitting: Hiscook, J.