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.
David Wright, Appellant, v. Nelson B. Eldred, Respondent, 1893 — 137 N.Y. 556 · caselaw · US
General
David Wright, Appellant, v. Nelson B. Eldred, Respondent
137 N.Y. 556·New York Court of Appeals·1893·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
David Wright, Appellant, v. Nelson B. Eldred, Respondent.
(Argued January 25, 1893;
decided February 7, 1893.)
Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the fifth judicial department, entered upon an order made October 21,1887, which denied a motion for a new trial and ordered judgment in favor of defendant upon a verdict directed by the court.
The following is the mem. of decision:
“A careful comparison of the record in this case with that of Shaver v. Eldred (114 N. Y. 236) satisfies us that there is no material distinction to be made between the two cases, and upon the authority and reasoning of that case this judgment is affirmed with costs.”
H. V. Howland for appellant.
Charles M. Baker for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Agree to affirm.
All concur, except Maynard, J., not sitting.
Judgment affirmed.