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.
Abraham Dubroff, Appellant, v. Curtis Brothers' Lumber Company, Respondent, 1907 — 187 N.Y. 517 · caselaw · US
Contracts · MBE-tested
Abraham Dubroff, Appellant, v. Curtis Brothers' Lumber Company, Respondent
187 N.Y. 517·New York Court of Appeals·1907·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
Abraham Dubroff, Appellant, v. Curtis Brothers’ Lumber Company, Respondent.
Dubroff v. Curtis Brothers’ Lumber Co., 106 App. Div. 611, affirmed.
(Submitted December 11, 1906;
decided January 8, 1907.)
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, entered June 13, 1905, affirming a judgment in favor of defendant entered upon the report of a referee in an action to recover for breach of contract.
Isaac H. Miller and Herman G. Loew for appellant.
George F. Alexander for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.
Concur: Cullen, Ch. J., Gray, O’Brien, Edward T. Bartlett, Werner, Hiscock and Chase, JJ.