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.
Jacob Wicks, Jr., Respondent, v. London and Lancashire Fire Insurance Company, Appellant, 1906 — 184 N.Y. 593 · caselaw · US
General
Jacob Wicks, Jr., Respondent, v. London and Lancashire Fire Insurance Company, Appellant
184 N.Y. 593·New York Court of Appeals·1906·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
Jacob Wicks, Jr., Respondent, v. London and Lancashire Fire Insurance Company, Appellant.
Wicks v. London & L. Fire Ins. Co., 102 App. Div. 615, affirmed.
(Argued March 16, 1906;
decided April 3, 1906.)
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered February 23, 1905, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a decision of the court at a Trial Term without a jury.
Ernest A. Gardozo and Michael II. Gardozo for appellant.
Gustav Lange, Jr., for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.
Concur: Cullen, Oh. J., Gray, Edward T. Bartlett, Haight, Vann, Willard Bartlett and Chase, JJ.