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.
William Duffus, Respondent, v. Christopher Schwinger et al., Appellants, 1898 — 157 N.Y. 685 · caselaw · US
General
William Duffus, Respondent, v. Christopher Schwinger et al., Appellants
157 N.Y. 685·New York Court of Appeals·1898·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
William Duffus, Respondent, v. Christopher Schwinger et al., Appellants.
Dnffus v. Balminger, 92 Hun, 70, affirmed.
(Argued October 7, 1898;
decided October 25, 1898.)
Appeal from a judgment of the late General Term of the Supreme Court in the fourth judicial department, entered December 27, 1895, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict, and an order denying a motion for a new trial.
George W. Gothran for appellants.
Walter S. MacGregor for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Judgment affirmed, with cos.ts; no opinion.
All concur, except Martin and Vann, JJ., not sitting.