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.
The Henderson Estate Company et al., Appellants, v. The Carroll Electric Company, Respondent, 1907 — 189 N.Y. 531 · caselaw · US
Administrative
The Henderson Estate Company et al., Appellants, v. The Carroll Electric Company, Respondent
189 N.Y. 531·New York Court of Appeals·1907·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
The Henderson Estate Company et al., Appellants, v. The Carroll Electric Company, Respondent.
Henderson Estate Oo. v. Oarroll Electric Oo., 113 App. Div. 775, affirmed.
(Argued June 12, 1907;
decided October 1, 1907.)
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, entered July 19, 1906, affirming a judgment in favor of defendant entered upon the report of a referee in an action to enjoin an alleged infringement of plaintiffs’ riparian rights.
Edward S. Sapallo and Willard Parker Butler for appellants.
Allison Butts, John PLackett and Samuel K. Phillips for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.
Concur: Cullen, Ch. J., Edwa.bd T. Babtlett, Haight, Yann, Webneb and Hiscook, JJ. Absent: G-bay, J.