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.
Rose Meyers, Appellant, v. Leon M. Hirsch, Respondent, 1896 — 148 N.Y. 744 · caselaw · US
General
Rose Meyers, Appellant, v. Leon M. Hirsch, Respondent
148 N.Y. 744·New York Court of Appeals·1896·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
Rose Meyers, Appellant, v. Leon M. Hirsch, Respondent.
Mem. of decision below, 89 Hun, 612.
(Argued January 20, 1896;
decided January 31, 1896.)
Appeal .from ordér of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, made October 18, 1895, which affirmed an order of Special Term staying plaintiff’s proceedings.
Sidney H. Stuart and Nathan Lewis for appellant.
Cha/rles Strauss for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Order affirmed, with costs; no opinion.
All concur.