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.
William A. James, Appellant, v. Gustav Schmidt, Respondent, 1874 — 57 N.Y. 686 · caselaw · US
General
William A. James, Appellant, v. Gustav Schmidt, Respondent
57 N.Y. 686·New York Commission of Appeals·1874·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
William A. James, Appellant, v. Gustav Schmidt, Respondent.
(Argued May 12, 1874;
decided September term, 1874.)
This was an action for conversion. The plaintiff was nonsuited on the trial. Held, that the evidence was sufficient to require the submission of the question to a jury.
C. Bainbridge Smith for the appellant.
Ira D. Warren for the respondent.
[MAJORITY — Reynolds, C.,]
Reynolds, C.,
reads for reversal.
All concur.
Judgment reversed.