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.
Mary Guenther, as Administratrix, etc., Appellant, v. James Lockhart, Respondent, 1893 — 137 N.Y. 529 · caselaw · US
General
Mary Guenther, as Administratrix, etc., Appellant, v. James Lockhart, Respondent
137 N.Y. 529·New York Court of Appeals·1893·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
Mary Guenther, as Administratrix, etc., Appellant, v. James Lockhart, Respondent.
(Argued December 20, 1892;
decided January 17, 1893.)
Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the fifth judicial department, entered upon on order made June 2, 1891, which overruled plaintiff’s exceptions, denied her motion for a new trial, and directed judgment in favor of defendant entered upon an order made at Circuit, granting a motion for a nonsuit.
James M. E. O’Grady for appellant.
Abraham Benedict for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Agree to affirm on opinion below.
All concur.
Judgment affirmed.