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 Skinner, Respondent, v. Le Roy Hydraulic Electric Gas Company, Appellant, 1907 — 187 N.Y. 575 · caselaw · US
Torts · MBE-tested
William Skinner, Respondent, v. Le Roy Hydraulic Electric Gas Company, Appellant
187 N.Y. 575·New York Court of Appeals·1907·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 Skinner, Respondent, v. Le Roy Hydraulic Electric Gas Company, Appellant.
Skinner v. Le Roy Hydraulic El. Gas Co., 115 App. Div. 895, appeal dismissed.
(Argued February 18, 1907;
decided February 26, 1907.)
Motion for leave to withdraw an appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the fourth judicial department, entered October 10, 1906, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict and an order denying a motion for a new trial in an action to recover for personal injuries alleged to have been received through defendant’s negligence.
The motion was made upon the ground that the Court of Appeals had no jurisdiction to review the questions involved.
Edward Harris, Jr., for motion.
George D. Reed opposed.
[MAJORITY]
Motion denied and appeal dismissed, with costs, and ten ■ dollars costs of motion.