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.
Niels Poulson et al., Appellants, v. Jose F. de Navarro et al., Respondents, 1902 — 171 N.Y. 692 · caselaw · US
General
Niels Poulson et al., Appellants, v. Jose F. de Navarro et al., Respondents
171 N.Y. 692·New York Court of Appeals·1902·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
Niels Poulson et al., Appellants, v. Jose F. de Navarro et al., Respondents.
Poulson v. de Navarro, 57 App. Div. 628, affirmed.
(Argued June 16, 1902;
decided June 27, 1902.)
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, entered January 29, 1901, affirming a judgment in favor of defendants entered upon a dismissal of the complaint by the court at a Trial Term and an order denying a motion for a new trial.
James C. Bergen for appellants.
George A. Strong for respondents.
[MAJORITY]
Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.
Concur: Parker, Ch. J., Gray, O’Brien, Bartlett, Martin and Vann, JJ. Taking no part: Cullen, J.