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.
Christopher P. Clark, Appellant, v. Frank H. Cross, Respondent, 1904 — 178 N.Y. 618 · caselaw · US
General
Christopher P. Clark, Appellant, v. Frank H. Cross, Respondent
178 N.Y. 618·New York Court of Appeals·1904·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
Christopher P. Clark, Appellant, v. Frank H. Cross, Respondent.
Ola/rk v. Gross, 77 App. Div. 682, affirmed.
(Submitted April 28, 1904;
decided May 17, 1904.)
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the fourth judicial department, entered November 26, 1902, upon an order affirming a judgment in favor of defendant entered upon a verdict and an order denying a motion for a new trial.
James A. Ward.iov appellant.
Thomas Burns for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Order affirmed, with costs; no opinion.
Concur : Parker, Oh. J., Gray, Bartlett, Haight, Vann and Werner, JJ. Not voting : O’Brien, J.