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.
Rastus S. Ransom et al., Respondents, v. Robert L. Cutting, Appellant, and Farmers' Loan and Trust Company, Respondent, 1907 — 187 N.Y. 528 · caselaw · US
General
Rastus S. Ransom et al., Respondents, v. Robert L. Cutting, Appellant, and Farmers' Loan and Trust Company, Respondent
187 N.Y. 528·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
Rastus S. Ransom et al., Respondents, v. Robert L. Cutting, Appellant, and Farmers’ Loan and Trust Company, Respondent.
Reported below, 112 App. Div. 150.
(Argued January 7, 1907;
decided January 15, 1907.)
Motion to dismiss an appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered April 10, 1906, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiffs entered upon a decision of the court on trial at Special Term.
The motion was made upon the grounds that the appeal was from a unanimous judgment of affirmance in an action to recover for services; that permission to appeal had not been given and no questions of law were involved that could be reviewed.
Mahlon A. Freeman for motion. '
Robert L. Cutting opposed.
[MAJORITY]
Motion denied, with ten dollars costs.