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.
Joseph O'Connor, an Infant, by Catherine O'Connor, His Guardian ad Litem, Respondent, v. Jacob Morch, Appellant, 1905 — 182 N.Y. 550 · caselaw · US
General
Joseph O'Connor, an Infant, by Catherine O'Connor, His Guardian ad Litem, Respondent, v. Jacob Morch, Appellant
182 N.Y. 550·New York Court of Appeals·1905·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
Joseph O’Connor, an Infant, by Catherine O’Connor, His Guardian ad Litem, Respondent, v. Jacob Morch, Appellant.
(Submitted October 2, 1905;
decided October 10, 1905.)
O'Connor v. Morch, 106 App. Div. 611, appeal dismissed.
Motion to dismiss an appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court, in the second judicial department, entered June 15, 1905, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict and an order denying a motion for a new trial.
The motion was made upon the ground that the Court of Appeals had no jurisdiction to review the judgment and order appealed from, said judgment unanimously affirming a judgment of damages for a personal injury and no permission to appeal therefrom having been granted.
John P. Donnelly and K. C. McDonald for motion.
Thomas C. Whitlock opposed.
[MAJORITY]
Motion granted and appeal dismissed, with costs and ten dollars costs of motion.