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.
Julia A. Riley, as Administratrix, etc., Respondent, v. Henry Gitterman et al., Appellants; Same v. Same, 1891 — 125 N.Y. 727 · caselaw · US
General
Julia A. Riley, as Administratrix, etc., Respondent, v. Henry Gitterman et al., Appellants; Same v. Same
125 N.Y. 727·New York Court of Appeals·1891·NY
All concur.
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
Julia A. Riley, as Administratrix, etc., Respondent, v. Henry Gitterman et al., Appellants; Same v. Same.
(Argued January 15, 1891;
decided February 3, 1891.)
Appeals from judgments of the General Term- -of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, entered upon orders made December 10, 1889, which affirmed judgments in favor of plaintiff entered upon a decision of the court on trial without a jury.
Donohue, Hewcombe <& Oardozo for appellants.
Thomas T. Pearsall for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Agree to affirm; no opinion.
All concur.
Judgment affirmed.