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.
Terrence F. Ferguson, Appellant, v. Julius F. Bruckman and Mary Bruckman, his Wife, Impleaded, Respondents, 1898 — 157 N.Y. 688 · caselaw · US
General
Terrence F. Ferguson, Appellant, v. Julius F. Bruckman and Mary Bruckman, his Wife, Impleaded, Respondents
157 N.Y. 688·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
Terrence F. Ferguson, Appellant, v. Julius F. Bruckman and Mary Bruckman, his Wife, Impleaded, Respondents.
Reported b'elow, 26 App. Div. 628; 18 App. Div. 858.
(Submitted October 17, 1898;
decided October 25, 1898.)
Motion to dismiss an appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, entered April 1, 1898, modifying, and as modified, affirming a judgment in an action for an accounting between partners entered upon the report of a referee; also an appeal from an order of the same Appellate Division, entered July 7, 1897, modifying an order of Special Term vacating a previous judgment in the same action and directing a new trial before another referee.
Sidney V. Lowell for motion.
Josiah T. Marean opposed.
[MAJORITY]
Motion denied, with costs.