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.
Thomas Commerford Martin, Appellant, v. William J. Johnston et al., Respondents, 1896 — 148 N.Y. 740 · caselaw · US
General
Thomas Commerford Martin, Appellant, v. William J. Johnston et al., Respondents
148 N.Y. 740·New York Court of Appeals·1896·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
Thomas Commerford Martin, Appellant, v. William J. Johnston et al., Respondents.
Reported below, 6 Misc. Rep. 310.
(Argued January 13, 1896;
decided January 28, 1896.)
Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Superior Court of the city of New York, entered upon an order made December 29, 1893, which affirmed a judgment in .favor of defendants entered upon the report of a referee dismissing the complaint.
Austen G. Fox for appellant.
Thomas J. Keigharn for respondents.
[MAJORITY]
Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.
All concur.