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.
Moffett, Hodgkins & Clarke Company, Respondent, v. Peoria Water Company, Appellant, 1896 — 148 N.Y. 737 · caselaw · US
General
Moffett, Hodgkins & Clarke Company, Respondent, v. Peoria Water Company, Appellant
148 N.Y. 737·New York Court of Appeals·1896·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
Moffett, Hodgkins & Clarke Company, Respondent, v. Peoria Water Company, Appellant.
Reported below, 83 Hun, 73.
(Argued January 6, 1896;
decided January 14, 1896.)
Appeal from order of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, made December 14, 1894, which affirmed an order of Special Term dismi. sing the summons and the action unless the complaint,' with the receivers of the plaintiff substituted as plaintiffs, should be served. within ten days from the entry of the order.
John M. Shedd for appellant.
Loms Marshall for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Order affirmed, with costs; no opinion.
All concur, except O’Beien, J., not voting; Vann, L, not-; sitting.