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.
Charles McCabe, Respondent, v. Sarah J. O'Connor et al., Appellants, 1900 — 162 N.Y. 600 · caselaw · US
General
Charles McCabe, Respondent, v. Sarah J. O'Connor et al., Appellants
162 N.Y. 600·New York Court of Appeals·1900·NY
Concur: Gray, O’Brien, Haight, Cullen and Werner, JJ. Not voting: Parker, Ch. J. Not sitting: Landon, J.
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
Charles McCabe, Respondent, v. Sarah J. O’Connor et al., Appellants.
McCabe v. O’Connor, 4 App. Div. 354, affirmed.
(Submitted February 9, 1900 ;
decided March 6, 1900.)
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the third judicial department, entered April 15, 1896, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon the report of a referee. .
Henry J. McCormick for appellants.
Frank S. Black for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Judgment affirmed, with costs, on prevailing opinion below.
Concur: Gray, O’Brien, Haight, Cullen and Werner, JJ. Not voting: Parker, Ch. J. Not sitting: Landon, J.