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.
Johanna Voos, Respondent, v. The Second Avenue Railroad Company, Appellant, 1884 — 97 N.Y. 649 · caselaw · US
Administrative
Johanna Voos, Respondent, v. The Second Avenue Railroad Company, Appellant
97 N.Y. 649·New York Court of Appeals·1884·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
Johanna Voos, Respondent, v. The Second Avenue Railroad Company, Appellant.
(Argued November 26, 1884;
decided December 16, 1884.)
Austin G. Fox for appellant.
Samuel Hand for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Agree to affirm; no opinion.
All concur, except Rapadlo and Andrews, JJ., dissenting. Judgment affirmed.