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.
Paul R. G. Hoest, Respondent, v. Montauk Brewing Company, Appellant, 1908 — 192 N.Y. 555 · caselaw · US
General
Paul R. G. Hoest, Respondent, v. Montauk Brewing Company, Appellant
192 N.Y. 555·New York Court of Appeals·1908·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
Paul R. G. Hoest, Respondent, v. Montauk Brewing Company, Appellant.
Horst v. Montauk Brewing Co., 118 App. Div. 300, affirmed.
(Argued April 17, 1908;
decided May 19, 1908.)
Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered March 28, 1907, reversing a judgment in favor of defendant entered upon a dismissal of the complaint by the court at a Trial Term and granting a new trial in an action to recover a balance alleged to be due for goods Sold and delivered.
Martin S. Lynch for appellant.
George A. Strong for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Order affirmed and judgment absolute ordered against appellant on the stipulation, with costs in all courts; no opinion.
Concur: Cullen, Ch. J., Gray, Haight, Vann, Willard Bartlett, Hiscock and Chase, JJ.