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 Union Stove Works, Respondent, v. Frederick Klingman et al., Appellants, 1900 — 164 N.Y. 589 · caselaw · US
General
The Union Stove Works, Respondent, v. Frederick Klingman et al., Appellants
164 N.Y. 589·New York Court of Appeals·1900·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
The Union Stove Works, Respondent, v. Frederick Klingman et al., Appellants.
Union Stove Works v. Klingman, 20 App. Div. 449, affirmed.
(Submitted October 10, 1900;
decided October 26, 1900.)
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered August 16, 1897, affirming a judgment in.favor of plaintiff entered upon a decision of the court on trial at Special Term.
George Bell and Benjamin Patterson for appellants.
Frank M. Avery for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Judgment affirmed, with costs, on opinion below.'
Concur: O’Brien, Bartlett, Haight, Martin, Yann and Landon, JJ. Not sitting: Parker, Ch. J.