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.
Francis A. H. Bergmann et al., Respondents, v. Hamilton H. Salmon et al., Appellants, 1893 — 139 N.Y. 611 · caselaw · US
General
Francis A. H. Bergmann et al., Respondents, v. Hamilton H. Salmon et al., Appellants
139 N.Y. 611·New York Court of Appeals·1893·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
Francis A. H. Bergmann et al., Respondents, v. Hamilton H. Salmon et al., Appellants.
(Argued June 20, 1893 ;
decided October 3, 1893.)
Appeal from order of General Term of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, made May 15, 1893, which modified and affirmed as modified an order of Special Term bringing into the above-entitled action certain parties defendant, permitting a former injunction to stand and continuing the same against said parties defendant.
Edward W. S. Johnston for appellants.
Lloyd McK. Garrison for respondents.
[MAJORITY]
Agree to dismiss appeal; no opinion.
All concur.
Appeal dismissed.