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 E. Peters, as Administratrix of Rody Peters, Deceased, Respondent, v. The United States Industrial Insurance Company, Appellant, 1897 — 154 N.Y. 758 · caselaw · US
General
Mary E. Peters, as Administratrix of Rody Peters, Deceased, Respondent, v. The United States Industrial Insurance Company, Appellant
154 N.Y. 758·New York Court of Appeals·1897·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 E. Peters, as Administratrix of Rody Peters, Deceased, Respondent, v. The United States Industrial Insurance Company, Appellant.
Peters v. United States Ind. Ins. Co., 10 App. Div. 533, affirmed.
(Argued October 26, 1897;
decided November 23, 1897.)
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, entered December 14, 1896, which affirmed a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict, and also affirmed an order denying a motion for a new tl'ial.
Eckocvrd W. S. Johnston for appellant.
Isaac M. Kcvpper for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Judgment and order affirmed on opinion below, with costs*
All concur.