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.
The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. E. Remington & Sons, Respondent. In the Matter of Thomas Ringwood et al., Appellants, 1890 — 121 N.Y. 676 · caselaw · US
General
The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. E. Remington & Sons, Respondent. In the Matter of Thomas Ringwood et al., Appellants
121 N.Y. 676·New York Court of Appeals·1890·NY
All concur except Eabl and O’Bbien, JJ., taking no part.
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
The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. E. Remington & Sons, Respondent. In the Matter of Thomas Ringwood et al., Appellants.
Appeal from order of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the fourth judicial department, made July 20, 1889, which affirmed an order of Special Term refusing to admit the claims of the petitioners to be preferred in the order of payment.
A. M. Mills for appellants.
Thomas Richardson for respondents.
[MAJORITY]
Agree to affirm on opinion of Follett, J.
All concur except Eabl and O’Bbien, JJ., taking no part.
Order affirmed.