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.
Prosper Monnet et al., Respondents, v. Henry Merz, as Survivor, etc., Appellant, 1892 — 131 N.Y. 646 · caselaw · US
General
Prosper Monnet et al., Respondents, v. Henry Merz, as Survivor, etc., Appellant
131 N.Y. 646·New York Court of Appeals·1892·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
Prosper Monnet et al., Respondents, v. Henry Merz, as Survivor, etc., Appellant.
(Argued February 29, 1892;
decided March 15, 1892.)
Appeal from order of the General Term of the Superior Court of the city of New York, made January 16, 1892, which denied a motion to dismiss an appeal taken by plaintiffs from a judgment entered by themselves in this action. .
William Man for appellant.
William Henry Arnoux for respondents.
[MAJORITY]
Agree to affirm; no opinion.
All concur.
Order affirmed.