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.
Cynthia Bronk, as Administratrix, etc., Appellant, v. The New York and New Haven Railroad Company, Respondent, 1888 — 110 N.Y. 671 · caselaw · US
General
Cynthia Bronk, as Administratrix, etc., Appellant, v. The New York and New Haven Railroad Company, Respondent
110 N.Y. 671·New York Court of Appeals·1888·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
Cynthia Bronk, as Administratrix, etc., Appellant, v. The New York and New Haven Railroad Company, Respondent.
(Argued October 3, 1888;
decided October 16, 1888.)
Appeal from judgment of the Court of Common Pleas in and for the city and county of New York, entered upon an order made March 14, 1887, which affirmed a judgment in favor of defendant entered upon an order dismissing the complaint on trial.
James W. Cairns for appellant.
Henry W. Taft for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Agree to affirm; no opinion.
All concur, except Danforth, J., dissenting.
Judgment affirmed.