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.
Albert M. Card, Respondent, v. John A. Moore et al., Appellants, 1903 — 173 N.Y. 598 · caselaw · US
General
Albert M. Card, Respondent, v. John A. Moore et al., Appellants
173 N.Y. 598·New York Court of Appeals·1903·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
Albert M. Card, Respondent, v. John A. Moore et al., Appellants.
Card v. Moore, 68 App. Div. 337, affirmed.
(Argued December 18, 1902;
decided January 6, 1903.)
Appeal from a judgment, entered July 30, <1902, upon an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, affirming an interlocutory judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a decision of the court on trial at Special Term.
Louis S. Philips and Richard F. Goldsborough for appellants.
Theodore F. Hamilton and Edward Stetson Griffing for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.
Concur: Parker, Ch. J., Gray, O’Brien, Bartlett and Haight, JJ. Absent.: Cullen and Werner, JJ.