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.
Loring R. Millen et al., Respondents, v. John C. Fogg et al., Appellants, 1891 — 126 N.Y. 680 · caselaw · US
General
Loring R. Millen et al., Respondents, v. John C. Fogg et al., Appellants
126 N.Y. 680·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
Loring R. Millen et al., Respondents, v. John C. Fogg et al., Appellants.
(Argued April 27, 1891;
decided June 2, 1891.)
Appeal from order of the General Term of the Superior Court of the city of New York, made February 10, 1891, which affirmed an order of Special Term directing a reference.
L. J. Morrison for appellants.
James G. JcmewaA/ for respondents.
[MAJORITY]
Agree to dismiss appeal; no opinion.
All concur.
Appeal dismissed.