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 Kimmerly, Respondent, v. Charles L. Gorham et al., Appellants, 1875 — 60 N.Y. 632 · caselaw · US
Contracts · MBE-tested
John Kimmerly, Respondent, v. Charles L. Gorham et al., Appellants
60 N.Y. 632·New York Court of Appeals·1875·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
John Kimmerly, Respondent, v. Charles L. Gorham et al., Appellants.
(Argued February 17, 1875;
decided February 26, 1875.)
This action was brought upon defendants’ acceptance of a draft; defendants showed a failure of consideration for the acceptance, and the only question presented was as to whether plaintiff was a Iona fide holder for value. Decided upon the facts in the case.
William Mitchell, Jr., for the appellants.
Samuel Hand for the respondent.
[MAJORITY — Allen, J.,]
Allen, J.,
reads for affirmance.
All concur.
Judgment affirmed.