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.
Stephen D. Arents, Plaintiff, v. The Long Island Railroad Company, Respondent. Asa W. Parker, Appellant, 1902 — 171 N.Y. 663 · caselaw · US
General
Stephen D. Arents, Plaintiff, v. The Long Island Railroad Company, Respondent. Asa W. Parker, Appellant
171 N.Y. 663·New York Court of Appeals·1902·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
Stephen D. Arents, Plaintiff, v. The Long Island Railroad Company, Respondent. Asa W. Parker, Appellant.
Arents v. Long Island, B. B. Go., 36 App. Div. 379, appeal dismissed.
(Submitted May 28, 1902;
decided May 29, 1902.)
Motion to dismiss an appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, entered January 31, 1899, which reversed an order of Special Term denying defendant’s motion to set aside several judgments entered in the action in favor of plaintiff’s attorney.
The motion was made upon the ground that the appellant had died since taking the appeal and that no steps had been taken towards substituting any one in his place.
William J. Kelly for motion.
No one opposed.
[MAJORITY]
Motion granted and appeal dismissed, with costs, and ten dollars costs of motion.