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.
Valentine Fink, Respondent, v. Simon Donau et al., Appellants, 1872 — 51 N.Y. 635 · caselaw · US
General
Valentine Fink, Respondent, v. Simon Donau et al., Appellants
51 N.Y. 635·New York Commission of Appeals·1872·NY
All concur.
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
Valentine Fink, Respondent, v. Simon Donau et al., Appellants.
(Argued May 14, 1872;
decided September term, 1872.)
This appeal presented numerous exceptions to the reception of testimony, and to the charge of the judge; all of which were disposed of, however,- by the application of well settled principles of law.
John H. Reynolds for the appellants.
Samuel Hand for the respondent.
[MAJORITY — Lott, Ch. C.,]
Lott, Ch. C.,
reads for affirmance.
All concur.
Judgment affirmed.