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.
In the Matter of the Application of Nathaniel B. W. Pritchard, Respondent, v. Richard Marvin et al., Appellants, 1899 — 158 N.Y. 667 · caselaw · US
General
In the Matter of the Application of Nathaniel B. W. Pritchard, Respondent, v. Richard Marvin et al., Appellants
158 N.Y. 667·New York Court of Appeals·1899·NY
All concur.
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
In the Matter of the Application of Nathaniel B. W. Pritchard, Respondent, v. Richard Marvin et al., Appellants.
(Argued January 9, 1899;
decided January 24, 1899.)
Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered November 3, 1898, affirming an order of Special Term fining-appellants for contempt and directing commitment to issue.
Matter of Pritchard v. Marvin, 33 App. Div. 639, affirmed.
Uriah W. Tompkins and D. Edgar Anthony for appellants.
Abram Kling for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Order affirmed, with costs; no opinion.
All concur.