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.
Thomas Pearsall Thorne et al., Respondents, v. Thomas Henry French, Appellant, 1894 — 143 N.Y. 679 · caselaw · US
General
Thomas Pearsall Thorne et al., Respondents, v. Thomas Henry French, Appellant
143 N.Y. 679·New York Court of Appeals·1894·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
Thomas Pearsall Thorne et al., Respondents, v. Thomas Henry French, Appellant.
(Argued June 21, 1894 ;
decided November 27, 1894.)
Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Superior Court of the city of New Fork, entered upon an order made July 7, 1893, which affirmed a judgment in favor of plaintiffs entered upon a decision of the court on trial at Special Term.
I)mid Gerber for appellant.
Charles Steele for respondents.
[MAJORITY]
Agree to affirm; no opinion.
All concur, except Eabl, J., dissenting.
Judgment affirmed.