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.
James G. Murphy, Appellant, v. Supreme Council of the Catholic Mutual Benefit Association, Respondent, 1901 — 165 N.Y. 638 · caselaw · US
General
James G. Murphy, Appellant, v. Supreme Council of the Catholic Mutual Benefit Association, Respondent
165 N.Y. 638·New York Court of Appeals·1901·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
James G. Murphy, Appellant, v. Supreme Council of the Catholic Mutual Benefit Association, Respondent.
Reported below, 51 App. Div. 618.
(Submitted January 7, 1901;
decided January 15, 1901.)
Motion to strike from the calendar an appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the fourth judicial department, entered May 3, 1900, affirming a judgment in favor of defendant entered upon a verdict directed hy the court.
The motion was made upon the ground that the case appears irregularly upon the calendar, the defendant not having perfected his appeal as required by the Code of Civil Procedure.
John J. Hynes for motion.
Edmund P. Cottle opposed.
[MAJORITY]
Motion granted, with ten dollars costs.