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.
The Third National Bank of Buffalo, Respondent, v. Buffalo Wheel Company et al., Appellants, 1902 — 171 N.Y. 637 · caselaw · US
General
The Third National Bank of Buffalo, Respondent, v. Buffalo Wheel Company et al., Appellants
171 N.Y. 637·New York Court of Appeals·1902·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
The Third National Bank of Buffalo, Respondent, v. Buffalo Wheel Company et al., Appellants.
Third Nat. Bank, v. Buffalo Wheel Go., 66 App. Div. 293, affirmed.
(Argued April 8, 1902;
decided April 18, 1902.)
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the fourth judicial department,' entered November 18, 1901, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a decision of the court on trial at Special Term.
James McC. Mitchell and Martin Carey for appellants.
Loran, L. Lewis, Jr., for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Judgment affirmed, with costs, on opinion below.
Concur: Parker, Ch. J., Bartlett, Martin, Vann, Cullen and Werner, JJ. Not sitting: Haight, J.