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.
Catharine B. Pitt, as Administratrix, etc., Appellant, v. Charles Kellogg, Respondent, 1891 — 124 N.Y. 653 · caselaw · US
General
Catharine B. Pitt, as Administratrix, etc., Appellant, v. Charles Kellogg, Respondent
124 N.Y. 653·New York Court of Appeals·1891·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
Catharine B. Pitt, as Administratrix, etc., Appellant, v. Charles Kellogg, Respondent.
(Argued February 23, 1891;
decided March 10, 1891.)
Appeal from order of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, made May 15, 1890, which affirmed an order setting aside a judgment in favor of plaintiff and granting a new trial.
Horace Secor, Jr., for appellant.
George H. Fletcher for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Agree to dismiss appeal; no opinion.
All concur.
Appeal dismissed.