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.
John Quill, as Administrator, etc., Respondent, v. The New York Central and Hudson River Railroad Company, Appellant, 1891 — 126 N.Y. 629 · caselaw · US
General
John Quill, as Administrator, etc., Respondent, v. The New York Central and Hudson River Railroad Company, Appellant
126 N.Y. 629·New York Court of Appeals·1891·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
John Quill, as Administrator, etc., Respondent, v. The New York Central and Hudson River Railroad Company, Appellant.
(Argued February 27, 1891;
decided March 17, 1891.)
Appeal from judgment of tlie General Term of the Court of Common Pleas in and for the city and county of Eew York, entered upon an order made June 18, 1890, which affirmed a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict.
Hamilton Harris for appellant.
Hugh L. Gole for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Agree to affirm; no opinion.
All concur.
Judgment affirmed.