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.
John P. Whitney et al., Respondents, v. The Hop Bitters Manufacturing Company, Appellant, 1890 — 121 N.Y. 682 · caselaw · US
General
John P. Whitney et al., Respondents, v. The Hop Bitters Manufacturing Company, Appellant
121 N.Y. 682·New York Court of Appeals·1890·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
John P. Whitney et al., Respondents, v. The Hop Bitters Manufacturing Company, Appellant.
(Argued May 1, 1890;
decided June 3, 1890.)
Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the fifth judicial department, entered upon an order made .the first Tuesday of October, 1888, which affirmed a judgment in favor of plaintiffs entered upon the report of a referee.
William F. Cogswell and J. Welling for appellant.
J. A. Stull for respondents.
[MAJORITY]
Agree to affirm; no opinion.
All concur.
Judgment affirmed.