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.
Benjamin N. Oakeshott, Appellant, v. James H. Smith et al., Respondents, 1906 — 185 N.Y. 583 · caselaw · US
Contracts · MBE-tested
Benjamin N. Oakeshott, Appellant, v. James H. Smith et al., Respondents
185 N.Y. 583·New York Court of Appeals·1906·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
Benjamin N. Oakeshott, Appellant, v. James H. Smith et al., Respondents.
Oakeshott v. Smith, 104 App. Div. 384, affirmed.
(Argued May 21, 1906;
decided June 5, 1906.)
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered May 19, 1905, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a dismissal of the complaint by the court at a Trial Term in an action to recover for an alleged breach of contract.
John E. Parsons for appellant.
William B. Hornblower and Hoffman Miller for respondents.
[MAJORITY]
Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.
Concur: Cullen, Ch. J., Gray, Edward T. Bartlett, Haight, Werner and Hiscock, JJ. Absent: O’Brien, J.