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.
Bertia V. Fowler, as Administratrix of Bertrand L. Fowler, Deceased, Respondent, v. Buffalo Furnace Company, Appellant, 1899 — 160 N.Y. 665 · caselaw · US
General
Bertia V. Fowler, as Administratrix of Bertrand L. Fowler, Deceased, Respondent, v. Buffalo Furnace Company, Appellant
160 N.Y. 665·New York Court of Appeals·1899·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
Bertia V. Fowler, as Administratrix of Bertrand L. Fowler, Deceased, Respondent, v. Buffalo Furnace Company, Appellant.
(Submitted October 2, 1899;
decided October 10, 1899.)
Fowler v. Buffalo Furnace Co., 41 App. Div. 84, appeal dismissed.
Motion to dismiss an appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the fourth judicial department, entered June 28, 1899, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict, and an order denying a motion for a new trial.
The motion was made upon the ground that the decision of the Appellate Division was unanimous.
Edward R. O’Malley and Isaac H. McEwen for motion.
Adolph Rebadow opposed.
[MAJORITY]
Motion granted on authority of Harroun v. Brush Electric Light Company (152 N. Y. 212).