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.
William Norsworthy, Appellant, v. Troy and New England Railway Company, Respondent, 1902 — 173 N.Y. 585 · caselaw · US
General
William Norsworthy, Appellant, v. Troy and New England Railway Company, Respondent
173 N.Y. 585·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
William Norsworthy, Appellant, v. Troy and New England Railway Company, Respondent.
Normortlvy v. Troy & New England By. do., 66 App. Div. 616, affirmed.
(Argued December 5, 1902;
decided December 18, 1902.)
Appeal fiom a -'ndgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Com in the third judicial - department, entered November 15, 1901, affirming a judgment in favor of defendant entered upon a dismissal of the complaint by the court at a Trial Tern.
H. Judd Ward for appellant.
James Farrell for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Judgment affirmd, with costs ; no opinion.
Concur: Parker, Ch. J., Gray, O’Brien, Martin, Vann, Cullen and Werner, JJ.