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.
Charles Fisher, Respondent, v. New York Dock Company, Appellant, 1905 — 181 N.Y. 579 · caselaw · US
General
Charles Fisher, Respondent, v. New York Dock Company, Appellant
181 N.Y. 579·New York Court of Appeals·1905·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
Charles Fisher, Respondent, v. New York Dock Company, Appellant.
Fisher v. New York Dock Co., 91 App. Div. 526, affirmed.
(Argued April 27, 1905;
decided May 30, 1905.)
Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, entered March 11,1904, sustaining plaintiff’s exceptions, ordered to be heard in the first instance by the Appellate Division, and granting a motion for a new trial.
George Gordon Battle, H. Snowden Marshall and Frederick E. Fishel for appellant.
J. Stewart Boss and John S. Griffith for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Order affirmed and judgment absolute ordered for plaintiff on the stipulation, with costs; no opinion.
Concur: Cullen, Ch. J., O’Brien, Bartlett and Vann, JJ. Not voting: Gray, Haight and Werner, JJ.