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 Rochester, Appellant, v. Rochester Railway Company, Respondent, 1905 — 182 N.Y. 559 · caselaw · US
General
The City of Rochester, Appellant, v. Rochester Railway Company, Respondent
182 N.Y. 559·New York Court of Appeals·1905·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 Rochester, Appellant, v. Rochester Railway Company, Respondent.
(Submitted October 16, 1905;
decided October 17, 1905.)
[MAJORITY]
Motion for reargnment denied. Motion to amend remittitur granted so as to strike out the provision for a new trial and to.direct the Supreme Court to award final judgment for the amount claimed in the complaint and for interest and costs and motion to amend in other respects denied. (See 182 N. Y. 99.)