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.
Joshua Davis, Appellant, v. Mary Davis, Respondent, 1896 — 150 N.Y. 571 · caselaw · US
General
Joshua Davis, Appellant, v. Mary Davis, Respondent
150 N.Y. 571·New York Court of Appeals·1896·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
Joshua Davis, Appellant, v. Mary Davis, Respondent.
Davis v. Davis, 4 Mise. Rep. 454, affirmed.
(Submitted October 6, 1896;
decided October 20, 1896.)
Appeal from order of the General Term of the Superior Court of the city of Buffalo, made May 22, 1893, which reversed a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon the report of a referee and granted a new trial.
Hayes, Qea/ron & Hibbard for appellant.
Daniel J. Eenefich for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Order affirmed, with costs, and judgment absolute ordered for defendant; no opinion.
All concur.