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.
Theodore E. Macy et al., as Executors, etc., Respondents, v. The Metropolitan Elevated Railway Company et al., Appellants, 1891 — 128 N.Y. 624 · caselaw · US
General
Theodore E. Macy et al., as Executors, etc., Respondents, v. The Metropolitan Elevated Railway Company et al., Appellants
128 N.Y. 624·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
Theodore E. Macy et al., as Executors, etc., Respondents, v. The Metropolitan Elevated Railway Company et al., Appellants.
(Argued May 6, 1891;
decided October 6, 1891.)
Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered upon an order made January 13, 1891, which affirmed a judgment in favor of plaintiffs entered upon a decision of the court on trial at Special Term.
Julien T. Davies for appellants.
George Zabriskie for respondents.
[MAJORITY]
Agree to affirm on opinion in Galway v. Met. E. R. Co. (ante, page 132).