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.
Mary V. Ayers, as Administratrix, etc., Respondent, v. The City of Brooklyn, Impleaded, etc., Appellant, 1882 — 87 N.Y. 639 · caselaw · US
Administrative
Mary V. Ayers, as Administratrix, etc., Respondent, v. The City of Brooklyn, Impleaded, etc., Appellant
87 N.Y. 639·New York Court of Appeals·1882·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
Mary V. Ayers, as Administratrix, etc., Respondent, v. The City of Brooklyn, Impleaded, etc., Appellant.
(Argued. January 25, 1882 ;
decided January 31, 1882.)
Damid M. De Witt for appellant.
Joseph It. Shoudy for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Agree to affirm; no opinion.
All concur, except Rapallo, J., absent
Judgment affirmed.