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.
Nicholas R. Acker, Respondent, v. The New York Central and Hudson River Railroad Company, Appellant, 1872 — 49 N.Y. 676 · caselaw · US
General
Nicholas R. Acker, Respondent, v. The New York Central and Hudson River Railroad Company, Appellant
49 N.Y. 676·New York Court of Appeals·1872·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
Nicholas R. Acker, Respondent, v. The New York Central and Hudson River Railroad Company, Appellant.
(Submitted May 22, 1872;
decided June 4, 1872.)
A. P. Zaning for the appellant.
George W. Cothrom for the respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Agree to modify by reducing the recovery to one penalty and excess of fare paid by plaintiff, and as modified affirmed with costs in court below, but without costs to either party in this .court.
Judgment accordingly.