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.
The City of Schenectady, Appellant, v. Robert Furman, Respondent, 1892 — 133 N.Y. 696 · caselaw · US
General
The City of Schenectady, Appellant, v. Robert Furman, Respondent
133 N.Y. 696·New York Court of Appeals·1892·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
The City of Schenectady, Appellant, v. Robert Furman, Respondent.
(Argued June 10, 1892;
decided June 17, 1892.)
Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court, in the third judicial department, entered upon an order made September 1, 1891, which reversed a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict directed by the court.
8. TF Jackson for appellant.
Robert J. Landon for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Appeal dismissed on argument.