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.
Alexander M. Powell, Respondent, v. F. C. Linde Company, Appellant, 1901 — 167 N.Y. 617 · caselaw · US
General
Alexander M. Powell, Respondent, v. F. C. Linde Company, Appellant
167 N.Y. 617·New York Court of Appeals·1901·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
Alexander M. Powell, Respondent, v. F. C. Linde Company, Appellant.
(Argued June 3, 1901;
decided June 11, 1901.)
Reported below, 58 App. Div. 261.
Motion to dismiss an appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department', entered March 15, 1901, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict and an order denying a motion for a new trial.
The motion was made upon the grounds that the Appellate Division unanimously decided that the verdict was supported by the evidence; that no questions of law are raised which can be reviewed by the Court of Appeals, and that the exceptions are frivolous.
Herman IF. Schmitz for motion.
Lloyd Thompson opposed.
[MAJORITY]
Motion, denied, with ten dollars costs.