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.
Amelia Sieburg, Respondent, v. Massachusetts Benefit Life Association, Appellant, 1898 — 156 N.Y. 669 · caselaw · US
General
Amelia Sieburg, Respondent, v. Massachusetts Benefit Life Association, Appellant
156 N.Y. 669·New York Court of Appeals·1898·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
Amelia Sieburg, Respondent, v. Massachusetts Benefit Life Association, Appellant.
Sieburg v. Massachusetts Benefit Assn., 87 Hun, 199, affirmed.
(Argued May 13, 1898;
decided June 7, 1898.)
Appeal from, a judgment of the late General Term of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered June 7, 1895, upon an order overruling defendant’s exceptions ordered to be heard in the first instance at General Term, and directing judgment on a verdict directed by the court in favor of plaintiff.
Cephas Brainerd and J. K. Hayward for appellant.
Andrew Shiland, Jr., for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Judgment affirmed, with costs, on opinion1 below.
All concur, except Parker, Ch. J., not sitting.