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.
Richard S. Peale et al., Appellants, v. Charles R. Benjamin, Defendant, and George C. Bartlett, Respondent, 1902 — 171 N.Y. 631 · caselaw · US
General
Richard S. Peale et al., Appellants, v. Charles R. Benjamin, Defendant, and George C. Bartlett, Respondent
171 N.Y. 631·New York Court of Appeals·1902·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
Richard S. Peale et al., Appellants, v. Charles R. Benjamin, Defendant, and George C. Bartlett, Respondent.
Peale v. Benjamin, 68 App. Div. 126, appeal dismissed.
(Submitted April 7, 1902;
decided April 15, 1902.)
Motion to dismiss an appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered January 31,1902, affirming a judgment in favor of defendant entered upon a verdict and an order denying a motion for a new trial.
The motion was made upon the grounds that the appeal is frivolous, without merit and taken only for delay.
John E. Judge for motion.
James C. Lenney opposed.
[MAJORITY]
Motion granted and appeal dismissed, with costs.