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.
Wilfred Eames et al., Appellants, v. Judson P. Morgan et al., Administrators, etc., Respondents, 1896 — 150 N.Y. 573 · caselaw · US
General
Wilfred Eames et al., Appellants, v. Judson P. Morgan et al., Administrators, etc., Respondents
150 N.Y. 573·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
Wilfred Eames et al., Appellants, v. Judson P. Morgan et al., Administrators, etc., Respondents.
(Argued October 6, 1896 ;
decided October 27, 1896.)
Eames v. Morgan, 77 Hun, 612, affirmed.
Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the fourth judicial department, entered May 23, 1894, which affirmed a judgment in favor of defendants entered upon a decision of the court on trial at Special Term dismissing the complaint.
William Neman for appellants. •
Watson M. Rogers for respondents.
[MAJORITY]
Judgment affirmed, with costs ; no opinion.
All concur, except Martin and Yarn, JJ., not sitting.