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.
William Kelly, Appellant, v. Anna C. Devlin, as Administratrix, etc., et al., Respondents, 1884 — 94 N.Y. 643 · caselaw · US
General
William Kelly, Appellant, v. Anna C. Devlin, as Administratrix, etc., et al., Respondents
94 N.Y. 643·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
William Kelly, Appellant, v. Anna C. Devlin, as Administratrix, etc., et al., Respondents.
(Argued November 19, 1883;
decided January 15, 1884.)
The opinion simply discusses the evidence, holding there was sufficient to sustain the judgment.
Nelson J. Waterbury for appellant.
John H. Strahan, Albert Cardozo and Richard L. Newcombe for respondents.
[MAJORITY — Per curiam]
Per curiam
opinion for affirmance.
All concur.
Judgment affirmed.