General
Andrew Harpending, as Administrator, etc., Appellant, v. Stephen T. Arnot et al., Respondents
96 N.Y. 649·New York Court of Appeals·1884·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
Andrew Harpending, as Administrator, etc., Appellant, v. Stephen T. Arnot et al., Respondents.
(Argued February 28,1884;
decided June 24, 1884.)
The principal question in this case was as to the effect of a former judgment as a bar. The court held that the material facts at issue herein were presented and determined m the former action, and that, therefore, it was a bar.
William F. Cogswell for appellant.
George B. Bradley for respondents.'
[MAJORITY — Roger, Ch. J.,]
Roger, Ch. J.,
reads for affirmance.
All concur, except Earl and Finch, JJ., dissenting, and Danforth, J., not voting.
Judgment affirmed.