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.
Frederick H. Smith, Jr., Respondent, v. Henry J. Crocker et al., Appellants, 1899 — 158 N.Y. 665 · caselaw · US
General
Frederick H. Smith, Jr., Respondent, v. Henry J. Crocker et al., Appellants
158 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
Frederick H. Smith, Jr., Respondent, v. Henry J. Crocker et al., Appellants.
(Argued January 9, 1899;
decided January 24, 1899.)
Reported below, 14 App. Div. 245.
Motion to dismiss an appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered February 18, 1897, 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 grounds that the judgment is not appealable; that the court has no jurisdiction to review it, and that the exceptions are frivolous.
James A. Dennison for motion.
Charles K. Beekman opposed.
[MAJORITY]
Motion denied, with ten dollars costs.