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 Garvin Machine Company, Appellant, v. The Hammond Typewriter Company, Respondent, 1899 — 159 N.Y. 539 · caselaw · US
General
The Garvin Machine Company, Appellant, v. The Hammond Typewriter Company, Respondent
159 N.Y. 539·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
The Garvin Machine Company, Appellant, v. The Hammond Typewriter Company, Respondent.
Garvin Machine Co. v. Hammond Co., 13 App. Div. 394, affirmed.
(Argued April 24, 1899;
decided May 12, 1899.)
- Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered December 19, 1896, upon an order affirming a judgment in favor of defendant entered upon the report of a referee.
Arthur J. Baldwin and James B. Dill for appellant.
R. D. Benedict for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Judgment and order affirmed, with costs, on opinion below.
All concur.