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.
Jonas S. Van Duzer et al., Respondents, v. The Elmira, Cortland and Northern Railroad Company, Appellant, 1897 — 152 N.Y. 634 · caselaw · US
General
Jonas S. Van Duzer et al., Respondents, v. The Elmira, Cortland and Northern Railroad Company, Appellant
152 N.Y. 634·New York Court of Appeals·1897·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
Jonas S. Van Duzer et al., Respondents, v. The Elmira, Cortland and Northern Railroad Company, Appellant.
Van Duzer v. Elmira, etc., R. R. Co., 75 Hun, 487, affirmed.
(Argued March 2, 1897;
decided March 16, 1897.)
Appeal from a judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the fourth judicial department, entered March 19, 1894, which affirmed a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict, and also affirmed an order denying a motion for a new trial.
Frederick Collin for appellant.
Gabriel L. Smith for respondents.
[MAJORITY]
Judgment affirmed on opinion below, with costs.
All concur, except Martin, J., not sitting, and Gray, J., not voting.