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.
William T. Reynolds et al., Appellants, v. Wilson S. Horton, Respondent, 1894 — 141 N.Y. 585 · caselaw · US
General
William T. Reynolds et al., Appellants, v. Wilson S. Horton, Respondent
141 N.Y. 585·New York Court of Appeals·1894·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
William T. Reynolds et al., Appellants, v. Wilson S. Horton, Respondent.
(Argued January 29, 1894;
decided February 27, 1894.)
Appeal from order of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, made February 13, 1893, which affirmed an order of the county judge of Columbia county vacating an attachment issued in behalf of plaintiffs.
Milton A. Fowler for appellants.
A. V. 8. Goehr ane for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Agree to affirm; no opinion.
All concur.
Order affirmed.