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.
Amelia R. Lowther et al., Respondents, v. Samuel V. Abel et al., Defendants, and Sylvan L. Cook, Appellant, 1906 — 184 N.Y. 535 · caselaw · US
General
Amelia R. Lowther et al., Respondents, v. Samuel V. Abel et al., Defendants, and Sylvan L. Cook, Appellant
184 N.Y. 535·New York Court of Appeals·1906·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
Amelia R. Lowther et al., Respondents, v. Samuel V. Abel et al., Defendants, and Sylvan L. Cook, Appellant.
Lowther v. Cook, 108 App. Div. 365, appeal dismissed.
(Submitted February 5, 1906;
decided February 13, 1906.)
Motion to dismiss an appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered December 8, 1905, 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 ground that the decision of the Appellate Division was unanimous, and that, therefore, no question is presented' that the Court of Appeals has jurisdiction to review.
W. H. Van Benschoten for motion.
Franklin Bien opposed.
[MAJORITY]
Motion granted and appeal dismissed, with costs and ten dollars costs of motion.